Nonsuicidal Self-Injury and Suicidal Behavior: A Latent Class Analysis among Young Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although there is a general consensus among researchers that engagement in nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI) is associated with increased risk for suicidal behavior, little attention has been given to whether suicidal risk varies among individuals engaging in NSSI. To identify individuals with a history of NSSI who are most at risk for suicidal behavior, we examined individual variability in both NSSI and suicidal behavior among a sample of young adults with a history of NSSI (N = 439, Mage = 19.1). Participants completed self-report measures assessing NSSI, suicidal behavior, and psychosocial adjustment (e.g., depressive symptoms, daily hassles). We conducted a latent class analysis using several characteristics of NSSI and suicidal behaviors as class indicators. Three subgroups of individuals were identified: 1) an infrequent NSSI/not high risk for suicidal behavior group, 2) a frequent NSSI/not high risk for suicidal behavior group, and 3) a frequent NSSI/high risk for suicidal behavior group. Follow-up analyses indicated that individuals in the 'frequent NSSI/high risk for suicidal behavior' group met the clinical-cut off score for high suicidal risk and reported significantly greater levels of suicidal ideation, attempts, and risk for future suicidal behavior as compared to the other two classes. Thus, this study is the first to identity variability in suicidal risk among individuals engaging in frequent and multiple methods of NSSI. Class 3 was also differentiated by higher levels of psychosocial impairment relative to the other two classes, as well as a comparison group of non-injuring young adults. Results underscore the importance of assessing individual differences in NSSI characteristics, as well as psychosocial impairment, when assessing risk for suicidal behavior.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".