MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976154110 · doi:10.1097/nmd.0b013e3181663026

Motives for Nonsuicidal Self-Injury Among Women With Borderline Personality Disorder

2008· article· en· W1976154110 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPersonality Disorders and Psychopathology
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBorderline personality disorderDysfunctional familyPsychologyFeelingClinical psychologyPersonalityHuman factors and ergonomicsPoison controlInjury preventionSuicide preventionMedicineSocial psychologyMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Patients with borderline personality disorder (BPD) are known to use nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI) as a dysfunctional strategy to regulate intense emotions. The primary purpose of this study was to clarify the motives for NSSI along with their interrelations. We further investigated the variety of emotions preceding NSSI and possible effects of NSSI on these emotions. To this end, a structured self-rating questionnaire on NSSI was administered to 101 female BPD-patients exhibiting NSSI. Most patients reported multiple motives for NSSI. The motives were more likely to compound than to exclude one another. Negative reinforcement was almost always involved in NSSI, whereas positive reinforcement (e.g., "getting a kick") played an additional role among about half of the patients. NSSI was usually preceded by a large variety of negative feelings that were reported to clearly improve with NSSI. In conclusion, therapists should anticipate a multidimensional functional spectrum when exploring motives of NSSI.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score0.445

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it