ArticlePCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences2024
Public attitudes and knowledge about self-injury: A cross-sectional web-based survey of Japanese adults.
Article in PCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Public attitudes and knowledge about self-injury: A cross-sectional web-based survey of Japanese adults.PCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: Nonsuicidal self-injury is common among adolescents. Dispelling related public misconceptions is essential for creating effective prevention and intervention strategies, as these myths contribute to stigmatization. This study examined the prevalence of self-injury myths among the Japanese public and explored how demographics and personal experiences influence these beliefs. Methods: A nationwide web-based self-report survey of 2000 Japanese adults (mean age = 44.6 ± 14.3 years) examined their agreement with 14 scientifically unsupported self-injury beliefs. Endorsement rates for each myth were calculated, and the associations between myth beliefs and other variables were explored. Results: Fourteen myths were analyzed, with endorsement rates of 21.0%-68.7%. Logistic regression analysis indicated that men were more likely to endorse the myth that self-injury is uncommon (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.45, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.17-1.79), whereas women were more prone to myths about the rarity of self-injury, using a single method, stimulation as the exclusive purpose, wrist-cutting prevalence, and average onset age. Younger participants were more likely to believe that self-injury is solely for stimulation than other age groups. Those with human-service professional experience were more likely to view self-injury as attention-seeking compared to those without such experience (AOR = 1.62, 95% CI = 1.07-2.46). With some exceptions, individuals who expressed confidence in their ability to respond to self-injurers were more likely to endorse the myths. Conclusion: These findings highlight the need for targeted educational interventions to dispel misconceptions about self-injury and improve public understanding of this complex behavior.
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.