Psihopatološke specifičnosti adolescenata sa samoozljeđujućim ponašanjem [Psychopathological features of adolescents who self-harm]
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction: \nSelf-harming behavior is prevalent both in community and in clinical population of adolescents. Potential negative outcomes of such behavior range from low quality of life, academic failure, development of mental health problems in later life to risk of suicide attempts and completition. Broadening and deepening of understanding of psychopathological and enviromental background and function of self-harming behavior is needed. Main goal of this study was identification of psychopathological features in referred adolescents with self-harming behavior which differentiate them from referred adolescents who do not engage self-harming behavior. Data provided with this study could be used in planning, preparing and conducting optimized treatment programs for adolescents and their caregivers, on primary and secondary prevention and treatment levels. \nMaterials and methods: \nDuring their initial interview with an child and adolescent psychiatrist adolescents filled out self-rated questionnaires. General questionnaire (with detailed family history), Youth Self Report, (ASEBA, 2001.), Functional Assessment of Self Mutilation (Lloyd E.,1997) - Adapted and modified, Parental bonding instrument (Parker, 1979.), Toronto Alexithymia Scale 20 (Taylor, 1992.) and Defense Style Questionnaire (Bond, 1983.). One hundred and fifty adolescents, 54% female, 46 % male (14–18 years old, median age 17 years) participated in the study. Exclusion criteria were psychotic disorders, cognitive impairment, pervasive spectrum, psychiatric emergency. They were assigned to two \n \ngroups according to self-harming status. In the self-harming group there were 24 males i 55 females, and in the non self-harming group there were 45 males and 26 females. \nResults: Self-harming behavior among females, compared to non self-harming group, corelates with low parental, especially paternal, care, commorbidity of depressive and externalising problems (clinical level on all YSR problem scales, except aggression), poor peer relationships, usage of immature defense mechanisms, and latent alexithymia. Self-harming behavior had negative interpersonal function. Self-harming behavior among males was correlated with maternal chronic illnes, maternal overprotection, commorbidity of externalising and latent internalising problems, usage of immature defense mechanisms, significant alexithymic difficulties, poor peer functioning. Self-harming behavior had positive interpersonal and identity and identification seeking function. Predominant parental style in both groups with self-harming behavior was affectionless control. Clinical levels of YSRs’ Total problems scale were found in both gender. \nConclusion \nSelf-harming behavior is prevalent among adolescents. Affected adolescents carry heavy psychopathological burden, with a risk for numerous negative events and outcomes including fatality. It has diverse, individually specific manifestations and functions which complicates research, understanding and clinical work. Hence, there are no specific, standardized preventive measures and treatment strategies developed yet. Interventions dealing with self-harming behavior should encompass multidisciplinary and multilevel approach, significant others need to be actively included in the process. Close follow-up and availability of help is needed because of the suicidal risk.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».