Developing a Policy, and Professional Development for School Staff, to Address and Respond to Nonsuicidal Self-Injury in Schools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI) can be a perplexing behavior: Why would someone deliberately damage their body to feel relief? Often starting in early adolescence, up to 1 in 5 high school students report engaging in the behavior. School staff (principals, teachers, and mental health professionals) are understandably concerned and have been calling for clear guidelines regarding how best to address and respond to NSSI. Based on the current evidence, we argue that schools need to develop a policy for NSSI and implement professional training for staff, which includes professional development and training, protocols for appropriate referrals of students, strategies for responding effectively to NSSI disclosures, safely discussing NSSI with students to minimize socialization effects, and a protocol for family and parent/caregiver engagement. We call on all schools, and school boards, to develop their own local policy, based on the guidelines we present in this policy brief.
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 | 0.185 | 0.196 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.019 | 0.018 |
| Open science | 0.009 | 0.018 |
| Research integrity | 0.043 | 0.036 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.007 |
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".