Prevalence and Associated Risk Factors of Self-Harm Among Health Care Workers: Protocol for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Self-harm is a major public health concern, with prevalence increasing worldwide, particularly after the COVID-19 pandemic and associated lockdown restrictions. Health care workers (HCWs) face various challenges, such as pressures of social and familial responsibilities, a lack of integration within the profession, heavier workload, bullying at the workplace, and limited support in the workplace, that impact their mental health and often lead to self-harm. OBJECTIVE: We aim to synthesize the evidence on the pooled prevalence of self-harm worldwide and identify risk factors for self-harm among HCWs. METHODS: We will conduct a systematic review of observational and experimental studies that investigated the overall prevalence of self-harm among HCWs. We will search the PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase, and CINAHL databases for eligible articles from inception until March 2025 using specific search terms developed using the population, exposure, comparison, and outcome framework. Study selection and reporting will follow the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) and the Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines. We will contact the corresponding author via email if the required data are not available in the article. After completing the article search, duplicate records will be removed. Titles and abstracts will then be screened according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, followed by retrieval of the full texts for detailed screening. All the required data for the review, such as names of authors, publication year, prevalence of self-harm, type of profession, associated risk factors to self-harm, and others, will be extracted using a standardized data extraction form. The quality of the studies will be assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines based on the study design. Random-effects meta-analysis will be used to derive the pooled prevalence using Stata (version 17.0) software. We will conduct a subgroup meta-analysis on sex, regions, and the type of profession (physicians or nurses). We will also examine the association of risk factors of self-harm with sociodemographic factors to observe their relationship. Both analyses will be performed using RevMan software. Publication bias will be examined using the funnel plot and Egger test. RESULTS: Data analysis is expected to be completed by August 2025, and manuscript preparation is expected to be completed by October 2025. This review is expected to be completed and published by January 2026. CONCLUSIONS: We will provide a comprehensive synthesis of the overall prevalence of self-harm among HCWs. We will also provide important information to develop effective strategies for preventing and managing self-harm among HCWs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42024581791; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42024581791. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/67059.
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 | 0,081 | 0,097 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,007 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,024 | 0,038 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,011 | 0,012 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,007 | 0,007 |
| Science ouverte | 0,005 | 0,005 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,006 | 0,007 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,072 | 0,007 |
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 ».