MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414181461 · doi:10.1192/j.eurpsy.2025.655

Self-harm, early emotional neglect and alexithymia in young Italian help seekers

2025· article· en· W4414181461 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Silvia Mammarella, Laura Giusti, Sara Del Vecchio, Anna Salza, M Casacchia, Rita Roncone

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Psychiatry · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlexithymiaToronto Alexithymia ScaleNeglectIntervention (counseling)Emotional intelligencePsychological abuseYoung adult

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Recent studies showed that non-suicidal Self-Injury (NSSI) is a transdiagnostic behavior with multiple functions and motivational factors. More specifically, two key functions have been identified: the first is an interpersonal function (hurting/punishing others, influencing others’ behavior); the second involves personal goals (emotions regulation, dissociation, self-punishment). Some distal factors may contribute to the onset of this behavior (e.g., childhood abuse, emotional neglect), resulting in emotional dysregulation and alexithymia. Alexithymia, also called emotional blindness, a coping strategy to reduce emotional pain following trauma traumatic life events, emerged as a predictor of NSSI. Objectives The study aimed to investigate in a sample of young Italian help seekers referred to an early intervention service and a university counseling and consultation service (1) the prevalence of NSSI behaviors; (2) their correlation to early traumatic life experiences and alexithymia symptoms. Methods From March 2023, the young adults participating in this study filled a standardized battery (through a QR code). In this preliminary analysis, only data concerning the Deliberate Self-Harm Inventory (DSHI), Childhood Trauma Questionnaire – Short Form (CTQ-SF), and the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS – 20) were considered. Results Nowadays, 73 young adults participated in the study (60% women; mean age 26 years, SD 4.2). A third of the sample reported NSSI behavior lifetime, with a higher distribution among women (χ2= 9.425 p=0.002). By comparing the NSSI and No-NSSI groups, only the emotional neglect dimension exceed the clinical cut-off even if statistically significant differences emerged in all the early traumatic dimensions, with higher scores in the NSSI group as regard the emotional abuse (F= 18.321; p=0.000), physical abuse (F= 17.556; p=0.000), sexual abuse (F= 5.200; p=0.026), emotional neglect (F= 20.053; p=0.000), physical neglect (F= 12.134; p=0.001), minimization/denial (F= 13.384; p=0.000). The alexithymia symptoms, assessed with the TAS-20 scale, the NSSI group showed higher scores with a statistically significant difference compared to the No-NSSI group (F= 15.842; p=0.000) and, specifically, in the “difficulty describing feelings” (F= 10.351; p=0.002) and “difficulty in identifying emotions” (F= 13.543; p=0.000). Conclusions According to the social neuroscience model, these preliminary results suggested that young adults that practice self-harm behaviors may have experienced early emotional neglect, determining a vulnerability to recognize and regulate emotions in response to stressful events. It is therefore crucial to assess and monitor this behavior in all young people help seekers from mental health services, concerning the history of traumatic events and emotional difficulties, to plan personalized evidence-based interventions. Disclosure of Interest None Declared

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean PsychiatrySame topicSuicide and Self-Harm StudiesFrench-language works237,207