Seena Fazel,Maria D L A Vazquez-Montes,Tyra Lagerberg,Yasmina Molero,Jane Walker,Michael Sharpe,Henrik Larsson,Bo Runeson,Paul Lichtenstein,Thomas R Fanshawe
{"title":"就医者重复自残的风险:临床风险评估模型 (OxSET) 的开发与验证。","authors":"Seena Fazel,Maria D L A Vazquez-Montes,Tyra Lagerberg,Yasmina Molero,Jane Walker,Michael Sharpe,Henrik Larsson,Bo Runeson,Paul Lichtenstein,Thomas R Fanshawe","doi":"10.1136/bmjment-2024-301180","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\r\nA self-harm episode is a major risk factor for repeat self-harm. Existing tools to assess and predict repeat self-harm have major methodological limitations, and few are externally validated.\r\n\r\nOBJECTIVE\r\nTo develop and validate a risk assessment model of repeat self-harm up to 6 months after an episode of non-fatal self-harm that resulted in an emergency visit to hospital or specialised care.\r\n\r\nMETHODS\r\nUsing Swedish national registers, we identified 53 172 people aged≥10 years who self-harmed during 2008-2012. We allocated 37 523 individuals to development (2820 or 7.5% repeat self-harm incidents within 6 months) and 15 649 to geographic validation (1373 repeat episodes) samples, based on region of residence. In a temporal validation of people who self-harmed during 2018-2019, we identified 25 036 individuals (2886 repeat episodes). We fitted a multivariable accelerated failure time model to predict risk of repeat self-harm.\r\n\r\nFINDINGS\r\nIn the external validations (n=40 685), rates of repeat self-harm were 8.8%-11.5% over 6 months. The final model retained 17 factors. Calibration and discrimination were similar in both validation samples, with observed-to-expected ratio=1.15 (95% CI=1.09 to 1.21) and c-statistic=0.72 (95% CI=0.70 to 0.73) in the geographical validation. At 6 months and a 10% risk cut-off, sensitivity was 51.5% (95% CI=48.8% to 54.2%) and specificity was 80.7% (95% CI=80.1% to 81.4%) in geographic validation; corresponding values were 56.9% (95% CI=55.1% to 58.7%) and 76.0% (95% CI=75.5% to 76.6%) in temporal validation. Discrimination was slightly worse at the 1-month prediction horizon (c-statistics of 0.66-0.68).\r\n\r\nCONCLUSIONS\r\nUsing mostly routinely collected data, simple risk assessment models and tools can provide acceptable levels of accuracy for repeat of self-harm.\r\n\r\nCLINICAL IMPLICATIONS\r\nThis risk model (OXford SElf-harm repeat tool) may assist clinical decision-making.","PeriodicalId":72434,"journal":{"name":"BMJ mental health","volume":"44 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Risk of repeat self-harm among individuals presenting to healthcare services: development and validation of a clinical risk assessment model (OxSET).\",\"authors\":\"Seena Fazel,Maria D L A Vazquez-Montes,Tyra Lagerberg,Yasmina Molero,Jane Walker,Michael Sharpe,Henrik Larsson,Bo Runeson,Paul Lichtenstein,Thomas R Fanshawe\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bmjment-2024-301180\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"BACKGROUND\\r\\nA self-harm episode is a major risk factor for repeat self-harm. Existing tools to assess and predict repeat self-harm have major methodological limitations, and few are externally validated.\\r\\n\\r\\nOBJECTIVE\\r\\nTo develop and validate a risk assessment model of repeat self-harm up to 6 months after an episode of non-fatal self-harm that resulted in an emergency visit to hospital or specialised care.\\r\\n\\r\\nMETHODS\\r\\nUsing Swedish national registers, we identified 53 172 people aged≥10 years who self-harmed during 2008-2012. We allocated 37 523 individuals to development (2820 or 7.5% repeat self-harm incidents within 6 months) and 15 649 to geographic validation (1373 repeat episodes) samples, based on region of residence. In a temporal validation of people who self-harmed during 2018-2019, we identified 25 036 individuals (2886 repeat episodes). We fitted a multivariable accelerated failure time model to predict risk of repeat self-harm.\\r\\n\\r\\nFINDINGS\\r\\nIn the external validations (n=40 685), rates of repeat self-harm were 8.8%-11.5% over 6 months. The final model retained 17 factors. Calibration and discrimination were similar in both validation samples, with observed-to-expected ratio=1.15 (95% CI=1.09 to 1.21) and c-statistic=0.72 (95% CI=0.70 to 0.73) in the geographical validation. At 6 months and a 10% risk cut-off, sensitivity was 51.5% (95% CI=48.8% to 54.2%) and specificity was 80.7% (95% CI=80.1% to 81.4%) in geographic validation; corresponding values were 56.9% (95% CI=55.1% to 58.7%) and 76.0% (95% CI=75.5% to 76.6%) in temporal validation. Discrimination was slightly worse at the 1-month prediction horizon (c-statistics of 0.66-0.68).\\r\\n\\r\\nCONCLUSIONS\\r\\nUsing mostly routinely collected data, simple risk assessment models and tools can provide acceptable levels of accuracy for repeat of self-harm.\\r\\n\\r\\nCLINICAL IMPLICATIONS\\r\\nThis risk model (OXford SElf-harm repeat tool) may assist clinical decision-making.\",\"PeriodicalId\":72434,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMJ mental health\",\"volume\":\"44 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMJ mental health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjment-2024-301180\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ mental health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjment-2024-301180","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Risk of repeat self-harm among individuals presenting to healthcare services: development and validation of a clinical risk assessment model (OxSET).
BACKGROUND
A self-harm episode is a major risk factor for repeat self-harm. Existing tools to assess and predict repeat self-harm have major methodological limitations, and few are externally validated.
OBJECTIVE
To develop and validate a risk assessment model of repeat self-harm up to 6 months after an episode of non-fatal self-harm that resulted in an emergency visit to hospital or specialised care.
METHODS
Using Swedish national registers, we identified 53 172 people aged≥10 years who self-harmed during 2008-2012. We allocated 37 523 individuals to development (2820 or 7.5% repeat self-harm incidents within 6 months) and 15 649 to geographic validation (1373 repeat episodes) samples, based on region of residence. In a temporal validation of people who self-harmed during 2018-2019, we identified 25 036 individuals (2886 repeat episodes). We fitted a multivariable accelerated failure time model to predict risk of repeat self-harm.
FINDINGS
In the external validations (n=40 685), rates of repeat self-harm were 8.8%-11.5% over 6 months. The final model retained 17 factors. Calibration and discrimination were similar in both validation samples, with observed-to-expected ratio=1.15 (95% CI=1.09 to 1.21) and c-statistic=0.72 (95% CI=0.70 to 0.73) in the geographical validation. At 6 months and a 10% risk cut-off, sensitivity was 51.5% (95% CI=48.8% to 54.2%) and specificity was 80.7% (95% CI=80.1% to 81.4%) in geographic validation; corresponding values were 56.9% (95% CI=55.1% to 58.7%) and 76.0% (95% CI=75.5% to 76.6%) in temporal validation. Discrimination was slightly worse at the 1-month prediction horizon (c-statistics of 0.66-0.68).
CONCLUSIONS
Using mostly routinely collected data, simple risk assessment models and tools can provide acceptable levels of accuracy for repeat of self-harm.
CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS
This risk model (OXford SElf-harm repeat tool) may assist clinical decision-making.