↓ Skip to main content

Recommended next care following hospital-treated self-harm: Patterns and trends over time

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Recommended next care following hospital-treated self-harm: Patterns and trends over time
Published in
PLOS ONE, March 2018
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0193587
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ella Arensman, Eve Griffin, Caroline Daly, Paul Corcoran, Eugene Cassidy, Ivan J. Perry

Abstract

The specific objectives of this study were to examine variation in the care of self-harm patients in hospital settings and to identify the factors that predict recommended next care following self-harm. Data on consecutive presentations to Irish emergency departments (EDs) involving self-harm from the National Self-Harm Registry Ireland from 2004 to 2012 were utilised. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were performed to assess the associations between patients' clinical and demographic characteristics, and recommended next care received. Across the study period a total 101,904 self-harm presentations were made to hospital EDs, involving 63,457 individuals. Over the course of the study there was a declining number of presentations resulting in patient admission following attendance with self-harm. Recommended next care varied according to hospital location, with general admission rates ranging from 11% to 61% across administrative health regions. Multinomial logistic regression identified that the factor which most strongly affected next care was the presenting hospital. Being male, older age, method, repeat self-harm, time of attendance and residence of the patient were all identified as influencing care received. Psychiatric admission was most common when highly lethal methods of self-harm were used (OR = 4.00, 95% CI, 3.63-4.41). A relatively large proportion of patients left the ED without being seen (15%) and the risk of doing so was highest for self-harm repeaters (1.64, 1.55-1.74 for those with 5+ presentations). The extensive hospital variation in recommended next care indicates that management of self-harm patients may be determined more by where they present than by the needs of the patient. The study outcomes underline the need to standardise the clinical management of self-harm patients in general hospital settings.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 53 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 15%
Researcher 8 15%
Student > Master 5 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 9%
Other 4 8%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 18 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 12 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 11%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 21 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 October 2019.
All research outputs
#13,346,498
of 23,025,074 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#106,008
of 196,293 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#166,891
of 331,156 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#1,831
of 3,579 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,025,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 196,293 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.2. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,156 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,579 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.