MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029468682 · doi:10.1080/13811118.2011.616154

The Possible Risks of Self-Injury Web Sites: A Content Analysis

2011· article· en· W2029468682 on OpenAlexaff
Stephen P. Lewis, Thomas G. Baker

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Suicide Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoison controlInjury preventionContent analysisHuman factors and ergonomicsOccupational safety and healthSuicide preventionEnvironmental healthMedical emergencyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goal of this study was to examine the content of non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) Web sites, often shared via e-communities. Using a content analysis, 71 Web sites were investigated. Web sites depict NSSI as: an effective coping mechanism (91.55%), addictive and difficult to stop (87.23%), and not always painful (23.94%). Almost all Web sites had melancholic tones (83.10%); several contained graphic photography (29.58%). Most NSSI messages (61.97%) were ambivalent (NSSI-accepting and deterring). Finally, several Web sites (11.27%) provided testimony that NSSI-content is triggering. Findings mirror recent work and NSSI material on these Web sites may normalize and reinforce NSSI. Professionals may need to assess the online activity of individuals who self-injure. Despite its risks, the Internet may serve as a vehicle to reach those who self-injure.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.372
GPT teacher head0.458
Teacher spread0.086 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations104
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Suicide ResearchSame topicSuicide and Self-Harm StudiesFrench-language works237,207