MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2750413679 · doi:10.1080/07448481.2017.1366496

A psychometric analysis of the Ottawa self-injury inventory-f

2017· article· en· W2750413679 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Joshua Travis Brown, Fred Volk, Gabrielle L. Gearhart

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of American College Health · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCronbach's alphaClinical psychologyAffect (linguistics)PsychologyAnxietyMental healthReliability (semiconductor)Concurrent validityPsychometricsPoison controlPsychiatryMedicineInternal consistencyMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This study seeks to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Ottawa Self-Injury Inventory-Functions (OSI-F) for assessing nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI), a condition for further study in the DSM-5. PARTICIPANTS: Participants included 345 students who indicated a history of self-injury in a university counseling center over six semesters from August 2009 to May 2012. METHOD: Participants completed the OSI-F as a measure on the psychological intake for the university counseling center. RESULTS: Factor analysis, Cronbach's alpha coefficients, independent sample t tests, and correlations were examined and demonstrated adequate reliability and validity. CONCLUSIONS: A three-factor solution emerged from the restructured OSI-F relating to Affect Regulation, Exhilaration, and Release. Affect regulation dimensions were predictive of continuing to self-injure and related to depression, anxiety, and overall mental health. Additionally, women were more likely to attribute self-injuring to affect regulation.

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)0.001
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 score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.432

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.341 · 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

Citations8
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of American College HealthSame topicSuicide and Self-Harm StudiesFrench-language works237,207