Cited by 29Suicide and Self-Harm StudiesProblem Solving Skills DevelopmentSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes

Group problem-solving skills training for self-harm: randomised controlled trial

Open access
McAuliffe, Carmel, McLeavey, Breda C., Fitzgerald, Tony, Corcoran, Paul, Carroll, Bernie, Ryan, Louise, O'Keeffe, Brian, Fitzgerald, Eva +4 more·2014·British Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract

Background: Rates of self-harm are high and have recently increased. This trend and the repetitive nature of self-harm pose a significant challenge to mental health services. Aims: To determine the efficacy of a structured group problem-solving skills training (PST) programme as an intervention approach for self-harm in addition to treatment as usual (TAU) as offered by mental health services. Method: A total of 433 participants (aged 18–64 years) were randomly assigned to TAU plus PST or TAU alone. Assessments were carried out at baseline and at 6-week and 6-month follow-up and repeated hospital-treated self-harm was ascertained at 12-month follow-up. Results: The treatment groups did not differ in rates of repeated self-harm at 6-week, 6-month and 12-month follow-up. Both treatment groups showed significant improvements in psychological and social functioning at follow-up. Only one measure (needing and receiving practical help from those closest to them) showed a positive treatment effect at 6-week (P= 0.004) and 6-month (P= 0.01) follow-up. Repetition was not associated with waiting time in the PST group. Conclusions: This brief intervention for self-harm is no more effective than treatment as usual. Further work is required to establish whether a modified, more intensive programme delivered sooner after the index episode would be effective.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1192/bjp.bp.111.101816

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Group psychotherapies reduced suicidal ideation in 5 of 10 studies and suicide in one study, but none reported reducing nonfatal suicide attempts.

    “Group psychotherapies reduced suicidal ideation in 5/10 studies(100–109) and suicide in one,(100) but none reported reducing nonfatal suicide attempts (Table S3c).”

    From Improving Suicide Prevention Through Evidence-Based Strategies: A Systematic Review (2021) · cites this paper as [108]

    The Results and the section ‘Outcome measures at baseline, post-assessment and follow-up’ report no significant difference in repeated self-harm between this trial’s group-therapy and usual-care arms. The paper does not establish the claim’s totals across ten studies or show that its intervention reduced suicidal ideation or suicide; those parts cannot be verified from this source. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Arensman E, McAuliffe C, Corcoran P, Perry IJ. Findings of the POPMACT study. Psychol Med 2004; 34: 1143-4.
  2. McLeavey BC. Self-poisoning: a study of psychological characteristics and an alternative treatment method. Department of Applied Psychology, University College Cork, doctoral dissertation, 1986.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McAuliffe, C., McLeavey, B. C., Fitzgerald, T., Corcoran, P., Carroll, B., Ryan, L., O'Keeffe, B., Fitzgerald, E., Hickey, P., O'Regan, M., Mulqueen, J., & Arensman, E.
Affiliations
  • University College Cork (IE)
  • Cork University Hospital (IE)
  • National Suicide Research Foundation (IE)
  • Health Service Executive (IE)
Corresponding author
McAuliffe, Carmel
Venue
British Journal of Psychiatry
Published
2014-05
Volume
204
Issue
5
Pages
383-390
ISSN
  • 0007-1250 (ISSN-L)
  • 1472-1465
OpenAlex
W2134401142
Cited by
29
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1
FWCI
3.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The British Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Arrow@dit (Dublin Institute of Technology) (acceptedVersion)
  • Cork Open Research Archive (University College Cork, Ireland) (submittedVersion)
  • Lenus, The Irish Health Repository (Dr Steevens Hospital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Health Research Board
  • Health Service Executive
  • University of Oxford
  • Dormant Accounts Fund
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Speech and Hearing › Problem Solving Skills Development
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Keywords
self-harm, problem-solving training, group intervention, repeated self-harm, psychological functioning, social functioning, help-seeking, brief intervention, mental health services
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Female, Humans, Male, Mental Health Services, Middle Aged, Problem Solving, Psychotherapy, Group, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Self-Injurious Behavior, Treatment Outcome, Young Adult

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