CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

AI Chatbot for Suicidal Prevention in LGBTQ+ Community

S, Mathupriya, U, Varsaa P, S, Lavanya, V, Dharshini·2025·2025 OITS International Conference on Information Technology (OCIT)
DOI 10.1109/ocit66168.2025.11400121
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The desire for self-acceptance and combating the fear of rejection, forms part and parcel of the struggling LGBTQ+ youths in India with the following having high rates of subjects with suicidal intentions. According to the National Library of Medicine 2022 Prevalence of Attempted and Completed Suicides among the 15 percent LGBTQ+ population in India stands at 56 percent a figure that is on the rise every year. Perhaps more shockingly, these represent responses from more than one in four subjects, and 26 percent of these are teenagers aged between 13 and 17, that is, the time they are discovering their real selves. LGBTQ+ population of India still continues to have high suicide rates even after government policies were put in place to protect the vulnerable group, this shows that there is need for better mental health care support as well as social acceptance of the group, and better implementation of protective laws.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/ocit66168.2025.11400121

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Mathupriya et al. (2025) system had no users consulted and was not evaluated.

    “No users were consulted and the system was not evaluated, but the design illustrates a risk that participatory studies treat as central: Biernesser et al. (2023) built procedures to avoid outing adolescents to their parents into every stage of their study.”

    From Artificial intelligence and immersive technologies for LGBTQ+ youth: a narrative review (2026) · cites this paper as Mathupriya et al. (2025)

  • Mathupriya et al. (2025) described an alert in a proposed gamified chatbot for LGBTQ+ youth in India that notifies parents, guardians, or close friends when the system detects high stress, presented as a safety feature.

    “In a proposed gamified chatbot for LGBTQ+ youth in India, Mathupriya et al. (2025) described an alert that notifies parents, guardians, or close friends when the system detects high stress, presented as a safety feature.”

    From Artificial intelligence and immersive technologies for LGBTQ+ youth: a narrative review (2026) · cites this paper as Mathupriya et al. (2025)

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 12

  1. 10.1109/ICAST59062.2023.10455044 · DOI
  2. 10.1109/aaiac60008.2023.10465291 · DOI
  3. 10.1109/icccnt61001.2024.10725061 · DOI
  4. 10.1109/ichi61247.2024.00066 · DOI
  5. 10.1109/istems60181.2024.10560327 · DOI
  6. 10.1109/ichi-w.2018.00015 · DOI
  7. 10.1109/icdt57929.2023.10150665 · DOI
  8. 10.1109/mitadtsocicon60330.2024.10575017 · DOI
  9. 10.1109/imcom56909.2023.10035659 · DOI
  10. 10.1109/ic3se62002.2024.10593341 · DOI
  11. 10.1109/icdmw.2019.00137 · DOI
  12. 10.1109/embc40787.2023.10339992 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
S, M., U, V. P., S, L., & V, D.
Venue
2025 OITS International Conference on Information Technology (OCIT)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2025-12-18
Pages
69-74
DOI
10.1109/ocit66168.2025.11400121
Cited by
1
References
0
Licence

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review