{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03024193548387097, 'fraction_numerical': 0.024193548387096774, 'mean_word_length': 5.4480519480519485, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Biological suicide research: outcome and limitations.

Empirical study of suicide began early in this century from the sociological (Durkheim 1951) and psychological (Freud 1956) perspective. A decade ago, a biological dimension was added, focusing on two major issues, i.e., are disturbances in brain functioning instrumental in the occurrence of suicidal behavior and/or do such disturbances increase the likelihood of suicidal behavior in an individual exposed to stressful events? Biological suicide research has developed as an offshoot of biological depression research. This is a logical development, as depression is a major precursor of both attempted (Weissman et al. 1973; van Praag 1982a) and completed (Guze and Robins 1970; Miles 1977) suicide. The major biochemical research targets are similar: monoamines and hormones. This paper will review the main findings in suicidal behavior, discuss the methodological shortcomings of this research, and indicate ways of avoiding them.