Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Growing interest has been paid to the concept of non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) recovery. In research, and sometimes clinical practice, the focus has been on NSSI cessation, with recovery operationalised with reference to the time since someone last self-injured. Yet, perspectives from people with lived experience of NSSI indicate that recovery is much more complex. Drawing on recent empirical work, and the voices of people with lived experience of NSSI, we outline a new framework for conceptualizing NSSI recovery. We argue that recovery is nonlinear and multifaceted, comprising: Realistic Expectations and Setbacks; Normalizing Thoughts and Urges; Fostering Self-efficacy; Identifying Strengths; Finding Alternatives; Addressing Underlying Adversities; Addressing and Accepting Scarring; Navigating Disclosures; and Self-acceptance. In presenting research and clinical implications of this new framework, we propose that this framing offers a more complete understanding of NSSI recovery-one conducive to optimizing wellbeing and promoting resilience among individuals with lived experience.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
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 it