Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 10, 2025

Implementation of a Real-Time Psychosis Risk Detection and Alerting System Based on Electronic Health Records using CogStack
Published on: May 15, 2020
Risk of repeat self-harm among individuals presenting to healthcare services: development and validation of a
Seena Fazel1,2, Maria D L A Vazquez-Montes3, Tyra Lagerberg4,5
1Department of Psychiatry, Warneford Hospital, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK seena.fazel@psych.ox.ac.uk.
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.
Related Concept Videos
Models of Health Promotion and Illness Prevention I
The health belief model (HBM) attempts to predict health-related behavior in specific belief patterns. According to the HBM, a person's...
Data Validation
Nursing assessment guides are generally based on holistic models rather than medical...
Models of Health Promotion and Illness Prevention II
The agent-host-environment model states that disease results...
Methods of Documentation VI: Case Management Model
For example, a patient with a chronic...
Modeling in Therapy
Participant Modeling
Participant modeling involves therapists demonstrating calm and effective behaviors in...
Healthcare Associated Infections II: Preventive Measures
The best practices for preventing healthcare-associated infections include hand hygiene, patient risk...

