↓ Skip to main content

Research with adolescents who engage in non-suicidal self-injury: ethical considerations and challenges

Overview of attention for article published in Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#30 of 455)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
9 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
122 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
Research with adolescents who engage in non-suicidal self-injury: ethical considerations and challenges
Published in
Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13034-015-0071-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elizabeth E Lloyd-Richardson, Stephen P Lewis, Janis L Whitlock, Karen Rodham, Heather T Schatten

Abstract

Non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) has emerged as a significant psychiatric issue among youth. In addition to its high prevalence rates, NSSI is associated with a number of psychiatric issues and confers risk for varying degrees of physical injury. It is also a risk factor for attempted suicide. Thus, youth who engage in NSSI represent a vulnerable and high-risk population and researchers are likely to encounter a variety of ethical challenges when conducting NSSI research. Accordingly, it is critical that researchers be familiar with the major ethical issues involved in NSSI research and how to effectively account for and address them. This is important both prior to obtaining clearance from their Institutional Review Boards and when carrying out their research. To date, there is no consolidated resource to delineate the ethical challenges inherent to NSSI research and how these can be effectively navigated throughout the research process. The goals of this paper are to review international best practices in NSSI research across the various contexts within which it is studied, to offer guidelines for managing these issues, to identify areas in which variation in approaches prohibits decisive recommendations, and to generate questions in need of further consideration among scholars in this field.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 122 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 122 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 16%
Student > Bachelor 18 15%
Researcher 12 10%
Student > Postgraduate 9 7%
Other 22 18%
Unknown 17 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 62 51%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 4%
Social Sciences 5 4%
Neuroscience 4 3%
Other 10 8%
Unknown 19 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 19 July 2018.
All research outputs
#964,133
of 14,547,106 outputs
Outputs from Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health
#30
of 455 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,168
of 250,203 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health
#1
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,547,106 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 455 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
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 250,203 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.