ArticleSocial theory & health : STH2020
The social life of self-harm in general practice.
Article in Social theory & health : STH, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- (Re)thinking about self-harm and autism: Findings from an online qualitative study on self-harm in autistic adults.Autism : the international journal of research and practice · 2025Article
- Exploring General Practitioners' Management of Self-Harm in Young People: A Qualitative Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Research engaging qualitatively with clinical practitioners' understanding of, and response to, self-harm has been limited. Self-harm offers a particularly compelling case through which to examine the enduring challenges faced by practitioners in treating patients whose presenting symptoms are not clearly biomedical in nature. In this paper, we present an analysis of 30 General Practitioners' (GPs') accounts of treating patients who had self-harmed. Our analysis demonstrates the complex ways in which GPs seek to make sense of self-harm. Illustrated through three common 'types' of patients (the 'good girl', the 'problem patient' and the 'out of the blue'), we show how GPs grapple with ideas of 'social' and 'psychological' causes of self-harm. We argue that these tensions emerge in different ways according to the social identities of patients, with accounts shaped by local contexts, including access to specialist services, as well as by cultural understandings regarding the legitimacy of self-harming behaviour. We suggest that studying the social life of self-harm in general practice extends a sociological analysis of self-harm more widely, as well as contributing to sociological theorisation on the doctor-patient relationship.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.