MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4407141862 · doi:10.1177/07067437251315526

The Relationship Between Family Dynamics and Help-Seeking and Disclosure of Adolescent Self-Harm and Suicidality: A Population-Representative Study: Relation entre dynamique familiale et recherche d’aide, et dévoilement des actes d’automutilation et de la suicidalité chez les adolescents : étude représentative de la population

2025· article· en· W4407141862 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Nicole G. Hammond, Christopher A. Gravel, Mark A. Ferro, Hannah Landry, Marie‐Claude Geoffroy, Nicole Racine, Ian Colman

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioDouglas Mental Health University InstituteMcGill UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuicidal ideationPsychologyHarmSuicide preventionPopulationClinical psychologyPoison controlPsychiatryInjury preventionSuicide attemptSelf-disclosureMedicineMedical emergencySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BackgroundFew studies have explored the potential for family dynamics to hinder or promote help-seeking and disclosure behaviours among adolescents who self-harm or experience suicidality. We sought to examine whether family dynamics may influence self-harm-related disclosure to parents or other family members and online help-seeking.MethodsWe identified youths, 14-17 years, in the 2014 Ontario Child Health Study (OCHS) who self-reported past-year suicidal ideation (with or without a suicide plan or past suicide attempt[s]) and/or non-suicidal self-harm. The OCHS is a provincially representative, cross-sectional survey. The person most knowledgeable about the adolescent, usually the mother, reported family dynamics: family dysfunction and positive and negative parenting practices. We used logistic regression to generate adjusted odds ratios.ResultsA total of 359 adolescents positively endorsed past-year suicidal ideation and/or non-suicidal self-harm. Disclosure and help-seeking were common (≥67.3% and ≥25.6%, respectively). Adolescents experiencing suicidal ideation and greater family dysfunction were more likely to share their suicidal thoughts with non-family compared to not telling anyone (OR = 1.09, 95% CI: 1.01 to 1.18) and were less likely to tell their parents or other family members about their suicidal thoughts when compared to non-family such as teachers, partners, or friends (OR = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.71 to 0.94). Positive parenting was not associated with any form of disclosure or online help-seeking for non-suicidal self-harm or suicidal ideation. As adolescent exposure to negative parenting increased, so did the likelihood that they would seek help online for their suicidal thoughts (OR = 1.22, 95% CI: 1.08 to 1.37). Sensitivity analyses replicated or were very similar to findings from the main models.ConclusionWe found that negative family dynamics were related to reduced sharing of suicidal thoughts with parents or other family members and greater online help-seeking. Our findings suggest that the importance of negative family dynamics to disclosure and support-seeking for adolescent suicidality may be under-recognized.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.800
Threshold uncertainty score0.397

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.065
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.330 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry→Same topicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies→French-language works237,207→