CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 390Suicide and Self-Harm StudiesHomicide, Infanticide, and Child AbusePersonality Disorders and Psychopathology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 109 of the 109 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Correlates of suicide attempts among self-injurers: A meta-analysis

Victor, Sarah E., Klonsky, E. David·2014·Clinical Psychology Review
DOI 10.1016/j.cpr.2014.03.005
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Suicide attempts (SAs) are common among those who engage in non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI). It is therefore important to determine which suicide risk factors are most predictive of SA among those who self-injure. Toward this aim, we conducted a systematic review of studies examining predictors of SA history among self-injurers. A total of 52 empirical articles provided data comparing self-injurers with and without SA. From these studies we focused our meta-analysis on the 20 variables that were evaluated with respect to SA history in five or more different samples. The strongest correlate of SA history was suicidal ideation. After suicidal ideation, the strongest predictors of SA history were NSSI frequency, number of NSSI methods, and hopelessness. Additional, moderate predictors of SA history included Borderline Personality Disorder, impulsivity, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, the NSSI method of cutting, and depression. Demographic characteristics, such as gender, ethnicity, and age, were weakly associated with SA history. Notably, some oft-cited risk factors for SA displayed small or negligible associations with SA among self-injurers, including histories of sexual and physical abuse, anxiety, substance use, and eating disorders. Findings have implications for conceptual models of the NSSI-SA relationship and the evaluation of suicide risk among self-injuring populations.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cpr.2014.03.005

Cites

109 of 109 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 390

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Victor, S. E., & Klonsky, E. D.
Affiliations
University of British Columbia (CA)
Corresponding author
Victor, Sarah E.
ORCID
Venue
Clinical Psychology Review
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-06
Volume
34
Issue
4
Pages
282-297
ISSN
0272-7358 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.cpr.2014.03.005
OpenAlex
W2018420818
Semantic Scholar
6c712388fdee278dfbbdadd874cb6b1aa4eeaad8
Cited by
390
References
108
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 37 · 2024: 35 · 2023: 38 · 2022: 33 · 2021: 45 · 2020: 39 · 2019: 26 · 2018: 29 · 2017: 32 · 2016: 28 · 2015: 24 · 2014: 5
FWCI
4.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • Clinical Psychology Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Homicide, Infanticide, and Child Abuse
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Disorders and Psychopathology
Keywords
suicide attempts, non-suicidal self-injury, suicidal ideation, hopelessness, borderline personality disorder, impulsivity, post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, suicide risk factors, cuttings, suicide risk assessment
MeSH terms
Borderline Personality Disorder, Humans, Impulsive Behavior, Risk Factors, Suicide, Attempted, Self-Injurious Behavior

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review