MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310255190 · doi:10.1002/jad.12126

Trajectories of nonsuicidal self‐injury during adolescence

2022· article· en· W4310255190 on OpenAlexaff
Lauree Tilton‐Weaver, Delia Latina, Sheila K. Marshall

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Adolescence · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersForskningsrådet om Hälsa, Arbetsliv och VälfärdVetenskapsrådetÖrebro UniversitetSvenska Forskningsrådet Formas
KeywordsIntrapersonal communicationPsychologyInjury preventionPoison controlSuicide preventionInterpersonal communicationClinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologyLatent class modelCohortMedicineSocial psychologyMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Although nonsuicidal self-injury is a public health concern, there is little information on how it changes across adolescence or what contributes to stability or change. We aimed to identify trajectories of stability and change in self-injury from ages 13 to 17 years, and to identify interpersonal and intrapersonal correlates that differentiate between trajectories of stability and change. METHOD: We used five annual waves of cohort-sequential data, targeting 7th and 8th graders attending all public schools in three municipalities in central Sweden. The data were gathered via questionnaires, using a multi-item measure of non-suicidal self-injury and assessing negative experiences at home, in school, with peers, and in romantic settings, as well as intrapersonal issues (internalizing symptoms and difficulties with emotional, and behavioral regulation). The analytic sample was 3195 adolescents (51.7% boys, 48.3% girls; ages 12-16 years at T1, M = 13.61; SD = 0.66), most of whom were born in Sweden (88.6%) to at least one parent of Swedish origin (77.4%). RESULTS: Latent growth curve modeling revealed three self-injury trajectories: a stable-low, a low-increasing, and an increasing-decreasing trajectory. Adolescents in the stable-low class reported the best overall adjustment at ages 13 and 16. Comparatively, adolescents in the other two classes reported similar levels of difficulty interpersonally and intrapersonally. Where they differed, the increase-decrease class fared worse than the low-increasing class. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests the need to frame self-injury as having multiple directions of development during adolescence and develop theory that aligns with differential patterns of self-injury development.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.737

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations30
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of AdolescenceSame topicSuicide and Self-Harm StudiesFrench-language works237,207