Non‐suicidal self‐injury, suicidal thoughts and behaviors in individuals with an eating disorder relative to healthy and psychiatric controls: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Eating disorders (ED) may be associated with an increased prevalence of non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) and suicidal thoughts and behaviors (STBs) relative to healthy (HC) and psychiatric (PC) controls. However, precise estimates of differences in prevalence between individuals with EDs and controls are unclear. We compared the prevalence of NSSI, suicidal ideation (SI), suicide attempts (SA), and deaths by suicide in controls and individuals with EDs. METHOD: We searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, and CINAHL for peer-reviewed publications reporting the prevalence of NSSI and/or STBs in EDs and HC or PC group (PROSPERO: CRD42021286754). A series of random-effects meta-analyses were conducted to estimate pooled odds ratios (ORs) for NSSI, SI, SA, and death by suicide in EDs. RESULTS: Across 32 studies, individuals with an ED had a significantly increased prevalence of NSSI (HC: OR = 6.85 [95% CI: 3.60, 13.04]; PC: OR = 2.74 [95% CI: 1.49, 5.06]), SI (HC: OR = 3.63 [95% CI: 2.43, 5.41]; PC: OR = 3.10 [95% CI: 2.01, 4.78]), and SA (HC: OR = 5.16 [95% CI: 4.27, 6.24]; PC: OR = 1.37 [95% CI: 0.37, 4.99]) relative to HC and PC groups. A 2.93-times increased odd of death by suicide did not achieve statistical significance. There was a high-level of heterogeneity between studies. DISCUSSION: Our findings indicate that ED populations have an increased prevalence of NSSI, SI, and SA but not death by suicide compared to controls and emphasize the need for effective clinical strategies to address these behaviors in ED populations. PUBLIC SIGNIFICANCE: This review provides evidence for an increased prevalence of non-suicidal self-injury, suicidal ideation, and suicide attempts in populations with eating disorders compared to controls. Our findings emphasize the need for effective clinical strategies to address these behaviors in patients with eating disorders.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".