The role of cognitive and personality factors in youth deliberate self-harm: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This systematic review aims to investigate the relationship between cognitive factors, emotional tendencies, and personality traits contributing to deliberate self-harm (DSH) behaviour among youth. This systematic review followed the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines. Literature searches were conducted in March 2024 using Scopus, PubMed, and Google Scholar, focusing on "deliberate self-harm," "youth," "cognitive factors," and "personality profiles." The search was limited to articles in English from medicine, psychology, and social sciences, published in the U. S., Canada, Australia, the U. K., and New Zealand. Articles were selected based on their relevance to youth DSH and related cognitive constructs, excluding those focused on suicidal ideation. A narrative synthesis was performed, and study quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. A total of 21 articles were identified and included in the final review. Emotional regulation emerges as crucial in preventing DSHing behaviours, with early detection facilitated by screening for impulsivity, sensation-seeking, and emotional dysregulation. Prevention strategies targeting specific cognitive patterns and personality traits associated with self-harm are informed by insights from this review, drawing from diverse studies. Limited yet promising evidence underscores the need for further research to elucidate these relationships. Additionally, significant correlations between specific online behaviors and DSH among youth are noted. Understanding these cognitive constructs and personality traits can offer timely support and guidance in clinical practice, potentially leading to more effective, personalized interventions for reducing DSH behaviour among youth. Prospero registration no.: crd42024525239.
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 | 0.022 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".