A Comparison of Self-Harm Presentations to Emergency Services
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Background: In the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edition, the distinction between nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI) and suicide attempts (SA) is highlighted in the section of conditions for further study. Aims: The objective of this study was to examine the correlates of people who presented to emergency departments (ED) with NSSI compared with those who presented with SA and no self-harm or suicidal ideation (no SH or SI). Method: Data came from 4,772 presentations to ED of tertiary care hospitals in Manitoba, Canada, between January 2009 and June 2012. Chart reviews were conducted for presentations with NSSI ( n = 158), and a sample of SA ( n = 172) and no SH or SI ( n = 173). Results: NSSI was associated with borderline personality traits/disorders, previous history of SH, and aggression/impulsivity compared with no SH or SI. SA was associated with a lower likelihood of adjustment disorder ( OR = 0.58; 95 % CI [0.34, 0.99]) and previous history of NSSI ( OR = 0.30; 95 % CI [0.17, 0.53]) compared with NSSI. Limitations: A limitation of this study is its cross-sectional design. Conclusion: Given the distress associated with NSSI, the findings highlight the need for treatment plans that address all those who present to ED with SH regardless of intent.
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".