Adolescents’ knowledge of a peer's non‐suicidal self‐injury and own non‐suicidal self‐injury and suicidality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Some research suggests that suicidal ideation and attempt among adolescents may be contagious - that is adolescents who are exposed to peers' suicidal behaviour are more likely to experience suicidal ideation or attempt suicide themselves. Less is known about the potential contagion effect of non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI). Our objective was to determine whether knowledge of a friend's NSSI is associated with adolescent's own non-suicidal self-injury and suicidal behaviours. METHODS: Data from 1483 youth ages 14-17 years were obtained from the 2014 Ontario Child Health Study, a cross-sectional population-based survey of children and adolescents in Ontario, Canada. Logistic regression models were used to examine associations between knowledge of a friend's NSSI and adolescents' own self-reported self-injurious and suicidal behaviours. Interactions with gender, age group and presence of a mental disorder were investigated. RESULTS: Knowledge of a friend's non-suicidal self-injury was significantly associated with the adolescent's own non-suicidal self-injury (OR = 2.03, 95% CI 1.05-3.90), suicidal ideation (OR = 3.08, 95% CI 1.50-6.30) and suicide attempt (OR = 2.87, 95% CI 1.20-6.87). CONCLUSION: These findings suggest an apparent contagion effect for non-suicidal self-injury. Awareness of a friend's self-injurious behaviours is associated with an adolescent's own self-injury and suicidality. Interventions aimed at preventing NSSI and suicidality should consider prevention of possible contagion at the school and/or community level.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".