MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210687855 · doi:10.7870/cjcmh-2021-020

Addressing Self-Injury Stigma: The Promise of Innovative Digital and Video Action-Research Methods

2021· article· en· W4210687855 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Stephen P. Lewis, Nancy L. Heath, Rob Whitley

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Community Mental Health · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotovoiceShameStigma (botany)Participatory action researchLived experiencePsychologyDigital storytellingStorytellingPsychotherapistClinical psychologySocial psychologyNarrativePsychiatrySociologyPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stigma associated with non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI), the deliberate damage of one’s body tissue for non-lethal reasons, is highly complex, far-reaching, and can have profound effects (e.g., shame, low self-esteem, thwarted help-seeking) on individuals with lived experience of NSSI. In concert with calls for greater inclusion of people with lived experience in NSSI research and advocacy, there are several robust and potentially impactful visual and digital research methods that directly involve individuals with lived experience, and which carry potential to tackle stigma. These methods, namely digital storytelling, photovoice, and participatory video, are largely underrepresented in contemporary NSSI research. Hence, the present commentary presents a concise overview of these methods and highlights their potential to address NSSI stigma.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.052
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.047
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score0.277

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0520.047
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.007
Scholarly communication0.0070.009
Open science0.0040.006
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.366
GPT teacher head0.547
Teacher spread0.181 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
DomainMethods
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Community Mental HealthSame topicSuicide and Self-Harm StudiesFrench-language works237,207