ArticlePloS one2023
NSSI questionnaires revisited: A data mining approach to shorten the NSSI questionnaires.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveNon-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) is a psychological disorder that the sufferer consciously damages their body tissues, often too severe that requires intensive care medicine. As some individuals hide their NSSI behaviors, other people can only identify them if they catch them while injuring, or via dedicated questionnaires. However, questionnaires are long and tedious to answer, thus the answers might be inconsistent. Hence, in this study for the first time, we abstracted a larger questionnaire (of 662 items in total) to own only 22 items (questions) via data mining techniques. Then, we trained several machine learning algorithms to classify individuals based on their answers into two classes.
methodsData from 277 previously-questioned participants is used in several data mining methods to select features (questions) that highly represent NSSI, then 245 different people were asked to participate in an online test to validate those features via machine learning methods.
resultsThe highest accuracy and F1 score of the selected features-via the Genetics algorithm-are 80.0% and 74.8% respectively for a Random Forest algorithm. Cronbach's alpha of the online test (validation on the selected features) is 0.82. Moreover, results suggest that an MLP can classify participants into two classes of NSSI Positive and NSSI Negative with 83.6% accuracy and 83.7% F1-score based on the answers to only 22 questions.
conclusionWhile previously psychologists used many combined questionnaires to see whether someone is involved in NSSI, via various data mining methods, the present study showed that only 22 questions are enough to predict if someone is involved or not. Then different machine learning algorithms were utilized to classify participants based on their NSSI behaviors, among which, an MLP with 10 hidden layers had the best performance.
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.