MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993908234 · doi:10.1192/apt.bp.112.011049

Young people who cut themselves: can understanding the reasons guide the treatment?

2013· article· en· W1993908234 on OpenAlex
Barry Wright, Naomi Hooke, Stephan Neupert, Nyein Chan, Suzy Ker

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

VenueAdvances in Psychiatric Treatment · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsChild, Adolescent and Family Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHarmPsychological interventionPsychologyCoping (psychology)PsychotherapistIdentification (biology)Clinical psychologyMedicinePsychiatrySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Young people who cut themselves may do so for reasons that go beyond diagnosis. Relevant processes include responses to trauma, coping, emotion regulation and cultural identification. Some clinicians regard those who self-harm negatively or consider one therapeutic approach to be suitable for all. This article explores the possible mechanisms involved when young people cut themselves and discusses therapeutic approaches in the light of these. Clinicians and researchers are encouraged to refine, develop and research interventions for young people who self-harm by cutting.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.586
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.297 · 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