4.4 Article

Meta-analysis of risk factors for nonsuicidal self-injury

Journal

CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY REVIEW
Volume 42, Issue -, Pages 156-167

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.cpr.2015.09.002

Keywords

Self-injury; NSSI; Risk factor; Meta-analysis; Longitudinal; Prediction

Funding

  1. Military Suicide Research Consortium (MSRC) - Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs [W81XWH-10-2-0181]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI) is a prevalent and dangerous phenomenon associated with many negative outcomes, including future suicidal behaviors. Research on these behaviors has primarily focused on correlates; however, an emerging body of research has focused on NSSI risk factors. To provide a summary of current knowledge about NSSI risk factors, we conducted a meta-analysis of published, prospective studies longitudinally predicting NSSI. This included 20 published reports across 5078 unique participants. Results from a random-effects model demonstrated significant, albeit weak, overall prediction of NSSI (OR = 1.59; 95% CI: 1.50 to 1.69). Among specific NSSI risk factors, prior history of NSSI, cluster b, and hopelessness yielded the strongest effects (ORs >3.0); all remaining risk factor categories produced ORs near or below 2.0. NSSI measurement, sample type, sample age, and prediction case measurement type (i.e., binary versus continuous) moderated these effects. Additionally, results highlighted several limitations of the existing literature, including idiosyncratic NSSI measurement and few studies among samples with NSSI histories. These findings indicate that few strong NSSI risk factors have been identified, and suggest a need for examination of novel risk factors, standardized NSSI measurement, and study samples with a history of NSSI. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available