MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801562563 · doi:10.1177/0143034318771415

Helping schools support caregivers of youth who self-injure: Considerations and recommendations

2018· article· en· W2801562563 on OpenAlexaff
Janis Whitlock, Imke Baetens, Elizabeth E. Lloyd‐Richardson, Penelope Hasking, Chloe A. Hamza, Stephen P. Lewis, Peter Franz, Kealagh Robinson

Bibliographic record

VenueSchool Psychology International · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthPsychologyMedical educationNursingMedicinePsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) is a significant international mental health concern, with consequences for not only youth who self-injure, but for their entire family system. Helping caregivers respond productively to their child’s self-injury is a vital part of effectively addressing NSSI. This paper will assist school-based mental health practitioners and other personnel support caregivers of youth who self-injure by reviewing current literature, highlighting common challenges faced by school-based professionals, and providing evidenced-informed recommendations for supporting caregivers of youth who self-injure. We posit that schools can best support caregivers by having clear and well-articulated self-injury protocols and by engaging caregivers early. Once engaged, helping caregivers to navigate first conversations, keep doors open, know what to expect, seek support for themselves and understand and address safety concerns will ultimately benefit youth who self-injure and the school systems that support them. We also review recommendations for working with youth whose caretakers are unwilling or unable to be engaged.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.053
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.096

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.053
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0070.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.011
Open science0.0040.007
Research integrity0.0110.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.329 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations32
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSchool Psychology InternationalSame topicSuicide and Self-Harm StudiesFrench-language works237,207