Barriers and responses to the disclosure of non-suicidal self-injury: a thematic analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) is a prevalent behaviour among youth and young adults, yet little is known about their NSSI disclosure experiences. Disclosure of NSSI may have important implications for accessing treatment and eliciting support from family and friends; it may also highlight where efforts are needed to combat potential barriers (e.g. shame). This study sought to better understand the factors that facilitate and discourage NSSI disclosure in a sample of undergraduate students as well as gather a richer understanding of young adults’ experiences disclosing NSSI. To do this, a thematic analysis of interview transcripts with 17 students (16 women and 1 man) was conducted. Themes related to barriers to disclosure (shame, concern about others) and disclosure recipients’ responses (silence/avoidance, understanding) were explored. Results underscored the central role of shame in NSSI disclosures, both as an experience impacting the difficulty and likelihood of disclosure and as a potential consequence of receiving avoidant responses to disclosure. Among the clinical implications discussed is the import of initiatives to reduce NSSI stigma and foster supportive and understanding responses to NSSI disclosures.
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 | 0.018 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".