“I wanted to be proud of myself, not ashamed”: A qualitative investigation of suicide and self-injury inflection points
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inflection points are pivotal moments immediately preceding self-directed violence (SDV; i.e., self-injury and suicide). This study qualitatively examined factors that contributed to halting SDV during inflection points. Participants (N = 166) completing an online survey were community-dwelling adults in the United Kingdom with some form of SDV lived experience. Thematic analysis yielded the following results. The most common themes across SDV inflection points were (in descending order): concern for the negative impact on others (e.g., fear of hurting loved ones), use of adaptive coping methods (e.g., general use of coping skills), physical deterrents (e.g., scarring, pain), social contact (sense of connection in the moment), and concern for negative consequences on oneself (e.g., fear of punishment). Healthy coping skill use contributed to halting both self-injury and suicide. Self-injury inflection points were largely characterized by intrapersonal factors, whereas suicide inflection points were highly interpersonal in nature. Implications for clinical practice, theory, and research are discussed.
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 | 0.016 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".