A comparison of self-harming behaviours in two prevalent groups of psychiatric outpatients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Self-harming behaviours and suicidality are a serious problem in psychiatric patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) and borderline personality disorder (BPD). Suicidal behaviours are sometimes seen as manipulative and attention-seeking in BPD patients, and are therefore not considered as dangerous as the same behaviours in MDD patients. The Suicidal Feelings and Self-Harm Questionnaire, which examines suicidal intent, was administered to all new outpatients at the Psychiatric Treatment Clinic in the Department of Psychiatry at the University of Alberta Hospital in Edmonton, Canada. Thirty-seven percent of the MDD patients, 78% of the BPD patients, and 77% of patients with comorbid MDD and BPD reported a history of self-harm. Suicidal intent was measured by asking the patients whether they expected to die as a result of their self-harm. There was no statistically significant difference between the diagnostic groups in this regard. This suggests that BPD patients are no less serious about their intent to die than those with MDD.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".