Source:http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/id/20091210
Switch to
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| lifeskim:mentions | |
| pubmed:issue |
5
|
| pubmed:dateCreated |
2010-4-7
|
| pubmed:abstractText |
Assessing self-harm through brief multiple choice items is simple and less invasive than more detailed methods of assessment. However, there is currently little validation for brief methods of self-harm assessment. This study evaluates the extent to which adolescents' perceptions of self-harm agree with definitions in the literature, and what level of question detail produces optimal concordance rates. Two hundred and thirty-three (69% female) first year university students aged 17-21 completed a self-harm coding task; we created three levels of question detail and randomly allocated participants to three study groups: brief, low detail, and high detail. The present findings suggest that that adolescents' perceptions of self-harm are generally concordant with a consensus definition of self-harm. Low level of detail in the question produced greatest accuracy in responses; adolescents who demonstrated adequate task understanding were able to correctly identify 94% of examples of self-harm behaviour and 86% of examples of behaviour that were not self-harm. We identified lower concordance rates for eating disordered behaviour and recreational petrol sniffing. This indicates that adolescents perceive these behaviours to be self-harm, in contrast to the reference definition we utilised. Overall, this study provides support for using a brief assessment of self-harm where minimal detail regarding self-harm behaviour is required.
|
| pubmed:language |
eng
|
| pubmed:journal | |
| pubmed:citationSubset |
IM
|
| pubmed:status |
MEDLINE
|
| pubmed:month |
May
|
| pubmed:issn |
1573-6601
|
| pubmed:author | |
| pubmed:issnType |
Electronic
|
| pubmed:volume |
39
|
| pubmed:owner |
NLM
|
| pubmed:authorsComplete |
Y
|
| pubmed:pagination |
504-13
|
| pubmed:meshHeading |
pubmed-meshheading:20091210-Adaptation, Psychological,
pubmed-meshheading:20091210-Adolescent,
pubmed-meshheading:20091210-Adult,
pubmed-meshheading:20091210-Empirical Research,
pubmed-meshheading:20091210-Female,
pubmed-meshheading:20091210-Humans,
pubmed-meshheading:20091210-Male,
pubmed-meshheading:20091210-Questionnaires,
pubmed-meshheading:20091210-Reproducibility of Results,
pubmed-meshheading:20091210-Self-Injurious Behavior,
pubmed-meshheading:20091210-Sensitivity and Specificity,
pubmed-meshheading:20091210-Statistics, Nonparametric,
pubmed-meshheading:20091210-Young Adult
|
| pubmed:year |
2010
|
| pubmed:articleTitle |
How much detail needs to be elucidated in self-harm research?
|
| pubmed:affiliation |
Psychology Department, Macquarie University, North Ryde, NSW 2109, Australia. stanfordsarah@hotmail.com
|
| pubmed:publicationType |
Journal Article
|