ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2026
Interpretable prediction of one-year non-suicidal self-injury among patients with mood disorders: model development and internal evaluation.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) is clinically important among people with mood disorders. We developed an interpretable machine-learning model for NSSI during one-year follow-up and evaluated its internal robustness. Methods: The cohort comprised 912 inpatients with mood disorders (MD) and 72 candidate predictors. We collected demographic information, disease characteristics and laboratory indicators of MD patients who were hospitalized throughout 2022, and followed them up one year after discharge to collect their NSSI incidence within one year. Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) regression was utilized to identify predictors associated with NSSI features. Subsequently, multiple machine learning algorithms were constructed, and the optimal model was selected based on its area under the curve (AUC), F1-score, and accuracy. Finally, Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP) were applied to the optimal model to rank feature importance and interpret the directional impact of each selected predictor on NSSI risk. Results: Fifty-two participants (5.70%) experienced NSSI. Across 25 repeated internal evaluations, random forest (RF) had the highest mean AUPRC (0.456; SD 0.116) and the most fold-level AUPRC wins (8/25) and was therefore designated the final model. The prediction of RF achieved a ROC-AUC of 0.861 (95% CI 0.738-0.951), AUPRC of 0.285 (95% CI 0.172-0.535) and Brier score of 0.070; at the locked threshold, recall was 0.091 and F1 was 0.133. RF SHAP importance was highest for age, previous NSSI, FT4, current NSSI and estradiol. Conclusion: RF showed the strongest repeated AUPRC among the evaluated algorithms and was selected as the final model, but the small number of events, very limited case detection at the locked threshold and absence of external validation preclude clinical deployment.
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.