Digital Phenotyping for Real-Time Monitoring of Nonsuicidal Self-Injury: Protocol for a Prospective Observational Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI) is a major global health concern. The limitations of traditional clinical and laboratory-based methodologies are recognized, and there is a pressing need to use novel approaches for the early detection and prevention of NSSI. Unfortunately, there is still a lack of basic knowledge of a descriptive nature on NSSI, including when, how, and why self-injury occurs in everyday life. Digital phenotyping offers the potential to predict and prevent NSSI by assessing objective and ecological measurements at multiple points in time. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to identify real-time predictors and explain an individual's dynamic course of NSSI. METHODS: This study will use a hybrid approach, combining elements of prospective observational research with non-face-to-face study methods. This study aims to recruit a cohort of 150 adults aged 20 to 29 years who have self-reported engaging in NSSI on 5 or more days within the past year. Participants will be enrolled in a longitudinal study conducted at 3-month intervals, spanning 3 long-term follow-up phases. The ecological momentary assessment (EMA) technique will be used via a smartphone app. Participants will be prompted to complete a self-injury and suicidality questionnaire and a mood appraisal questionnaire 3 times a day for a duration of 14 days. A wrist-worn wearable device will be used to collect heart rate, step count, and sleep patterns from participants. Dynamic structural equation modeling and machine learning approaches will be used. RESULTS: Participant recruitment and data collection started in October 2023. Data collection and analysis are expected to be completed by December 2024. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at scientific conferences. CONCLUSIONS: The insights gained from this study will not only shed light on the underlying mechanisms of NSSI but also pave the way for the development of tailored and culturally sensitive treatment options that can effectively address this major mental health concern. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/53597.
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 | 0.030 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.034 | 0.009 |
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".