Adversity, social support and risk of self-harm during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Abstract read

In one paragraph

Article in BJPsych open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

1citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

Intolerance of uncertainty and suicidal ideation among Chinese college students: the mediating role of non-suicidal self-injury and the stage-specific moderating roles of perceived social support.Frontiers in psychology · 2026
Article

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Rohan BorschmannJustice Health Unit, Centre for Health Equity, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Australia; and Centre for Adolescent Health, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, Australia; and Department of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Warneford Hospital, Oxford, UK; and Melbourne School of Psychological Sciences, University of Melbourne, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0365-7775

Paul A MoranCentre for Academic Mental Health, Department of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9257-8699

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Little is known about the degree to which social factors interact with COVID-19-related adversity to increase the risk of self-harm thoughts and behaviours. Using data derived from a UK cohort study, Paul & Fancourt found that loneliness was associated with an increase in the odds of self-harm thoughts and behaviours, whereas high-quality social support protected against self-harm thoughts and behaviours. The authors concluded that it is the quality of social support and interactions, rather than the act of engaging in social interaction per se, that protects against self-harm in the context of adversity. The COVID-19 pandemic may exert longer-lasting effects on population mental health, and continued surveillance of mental health, including self-harm status, will be essential. If accompanied by appropriate measures of the availability and quality of social support, such monitoring could also inform the development of more effective adaptive interventions for those at risk of engaging in self-harm.

Indexed as

adversityCOVID-19lonelinessSelf-harmsocial deprivation

Identifiers

PMID35876072

DOI10.1192/bjo.2022.553

PMCPMC9314317

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

LicenceCC BY

Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.