Farsi Translation of Four Additional Items for the Addictive Features Section of the Ottawa Self-injury Inventory Version 3.1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dear Editor,Self-harm (non‐suicidal self‐injury) is a major global health issue,1 especially among adolescents2 and psychiatric patients.3 The association of self-harm and the risk of suicide is extensively documented.1 Interest in self‐harm by both clinicians and researchers is now well-established4. This growing interest has been accompanied by the development of several psychometric instruments to examine the prevalence, frequency, and psychological functions of self-harm.5,6 One such scale is the Ottawa Self-Injury Inventory (OSI-3.1).6,7 The OSI 3.1 is a 26‐item self‐report questionnaire aimed at measuring the occurrence, frequency (eight items), types (eighteen items), and functions (seven items) of self‐harm.Recent research has examined the psychometric properties of the Persian version of the OSI-3.1)8 among a sample of 310 hospitalised patients who had been referred to Nekoei-Hedayati Hospital, Qom City, Iran, with non-suicidal self-injury. The results showed that the Persian version of the OSI 3.1 had satisfactory reliability (Cronbach’s alpha 0.71) and validity (Content Validity Index [CVI] 0.75; Content Validity Ratio [CVR] 0.79) in this sample. Moreover, it was also found that 52% of the sample reported at least one addictive characteristic. These findings are of importance to a better understanding of research and practice of self-harm in at least three potentially significant ways.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".