A Double-Edged Sword: A Review of Benefits and Risks of Online Nonsuicidal Self-Injury Activities
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This review aimed to synthesize current evidence on the perceived benefits and risks of online activity pertinent to nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI). METHOD: A systematic literature search was conducted to identify peer-reviewed articles, which yielded a total of 27 articles published between 2005 and 2015. Following this, a thematic analysis was employed to identify perceived benefits and risks of online NSSI activity. RESULTS: Our thematic analysis identified 4 potential benefits (mitigation of social isolation, recovery encouragement, emotional self-disclosure, curbing NSSI urges) and 3 potential risks (NSSI reinforcement, triggering NSSI urges, stigmatization of NSSI) associated with online NSSI activities. CONCLUSION: Given the double-edged effect of online NSSI activities, clinicians may benefit from incorporating clients' online NSSI activity in the context of NSSI assessment and treatment. Future research ought to directly examine the link between online NSSI activity and NSSI behavior to better understand the nature of these benefits and risks.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it