MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2194629014 · doi:10.1111/sltb.12232

Empirically Derived Subgroups of Self‐Injurious Thoughts and Behavior: Application of Latent Class Analysis

2016· article· en· W2194629014 on OpenAlexaff
Katie Dhingra, Daniel Boduszek, E. David Klonsky

Bibliographic record

VenueSuicide and Life-Threatening Behavior · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDisengagement theorySuicidal ideationLatent class modelClinical psychologyPsychologyPoison controlSuicide preventionInjury preventionMedicineMedical emergencyGerontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Latent class analysis was applied to the sample data to identify homogenous subtypes or classes of self-injurious thoughts and behavior (SITB) based on indicators indexing suicide ideation, suicide gesture, suicide attempt, thoughts of nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI), and NSSI behavior. Analyses were based on a sample of 1,809 healthy adults. Associations between the emergent latent classes and demographic, psychological, and clinical characteristics were assessed. Two clinically relevant subtypes were identified, in addition to a class who reported few SITBs, and were labeled as follows: low SITBs (25.8%), NSSI and ideation (25%), and suicidal behavior (29.2%). Several unique differences between the latent classes and external measures emerged. For instance, those belonging to the NSSI and ideation class compared with the suicidal behavior class reported lower levels of entrapment, burdensomeness, fearlessness about death, exposure to the attempted suicide or self-injury of family members and close friends, and higher levels of goal disengagement and acute agitation. SITBs are best explained by three homogenous subgroups that display quantitative and qualitative differences. Profiling the behavioral and cognitive components of suicidal and nonsuicidal self-injury is potentially useful as a first step in developing tailored intervention and treatment programs.

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 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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.910

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations39
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSuicide and Life-Threatening BehaviorSame topicSuicide and Self-Harm StudiesFrench-language works237,207