Correlates of Nonsuicidal Self-Injury and Suicide Attempts among Tertiary Care, Emergency Department Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: In the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, the distinction between nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI) and suicidal behaviour disorder is highlighted in the section Conditions for Further Study. Diagnostic criteria classify NSSI and suicidal behaviour disorder as distinct disorders, with the latter including suicide attempt (SA). This study examined the prevalence and correlates of NSSI in emergency department (ED) settings and compared them to SA. METHODS: Data came from adult referrals to psychiatric services in 2 EDs between January 2009 and June 2011 (n = 5336). NSSI was compared with SA, as well as no suicidal behaviour, across a broad range of demographic and diagnostic correlates. RESULTS: NSSI was more highly associated with female sex, childhood abuse, anxiety disorders, major depressive disorder (MDD), aggression and impulsivity, age under 45, and substance use disorders (SUDs), compared with presentations without suicidal behaviour. Comparing NSSI and SA, no differences were observed on sex, age, history of child abuse, or presence of anxiety or SUDs. Recent life stressors (OR 1.44; 95% CI 1.05 to 1.99), active suicidal ideation (OR 8.84; 95% CI 5.26 to 14.85), MDD (OR 3.05; 95% CI 2.23 to 4.17), previous psychiatric care or SA (OR 1.89; 95% CI 1.36 to 2.64), and single marital status (OR 1.63; 95% CI 1.20 to 2.22) contributed to a higher SA rate. Among people with NSSI, 83.7% presented only once to an ED. Among people who presented multiple times, only 18.2% re-presented with NSSI. CONCLUSIONS: NSSI is associated with early life adversity and psychiatric comorbidity. Most people present only once to ED services, and self-harm presentations seemed to change over time. Future studies should continue to clarify whether NSSI and SA have distinct risk profiles.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".