Review articleRisk factors and correlates of deliberate self-harm behavior: A systematic review
Introduction
Deliberate self-harm behavior is a significant health problem that is increasingly being studied as a clinical phenomenon in its own right [1], [2], [3]. It is detrimental to the body and may impede social relations, medical treatment, and psychotherapy [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9]. Some reports characterize aggressive acts against one's own body as indicative of especially severe psychopathological problems [6], [10].
The most accepted term for auto-destructive acts in the literature is self-harm[3] or, more specifically, deliberate self-harm behavior[11]. It is defined as the intentional self-induced harming of one's own body resulting in relevant tissue damage [5], [6], [11], [12]. The term encompasses self-injurious behaviors and more indirect forms of bodily harm [13]. It is largely agreed upon to exclude the following from the definition: (a) phenomena that are explicit symptoms or classificatory criteria of other disorders, such as eating disorders or substance abuse; (b) everyday behaviors, such as unhealthy eating habits or lack of exercise; and (c) psychological self-harm, such as deliberately engaging in an abasing partnership. The latter is occasionally studied in the context of borderline personality disorder [14]. However, there is little consensus as to how to classify different levels of frequency, severity (e.g., delicate self-cutting vs. auto-mutilation), or specific forms of deliberate self-harm, such as self-poisoning. Another complex issue is how to distinguish between deliberate self-harm and suicidal behavior.
Prominent definitions of deliberate self-harm behavior exclude suicidal intention [5], [12], [15]. This understanding prevails in U.S. publications, whereas the term self-harm generally includes behaviors irrespective of a suicidal intention in the UK, thus encompassing self-harm behaviors with and without suicidal intention. This discrepancy limits cross-national study comparability. There is some comorbidity between suicidal and nonsuicidal self-harm, and deliberate self-harm is prognostic for suicide attempts [14], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21]. However, there appear to be some important differences between self-harm with the intent to die and self-harm with no intent to die [22]. Studies have revealed a distinction between the psychological functions of suicidal and nonsuicidal self-harm behavior [13]. This distinction is based on the criterion of intention, which is difficult to operationalize. Suicidal intentions may be ambivalent, dissimulated, or concealed. Thus, intention is more difficult to measure reliably than observable behavior [16]. Skegg [3] proposes assessing self-harm behavior descriptively and many authors have adopted the approach of assessing deliberate self-harm as an act of intentional self-injury or self-poisoning “irrespective of the apparent purpose of the act” [23]. However, if we want to expand our knowledge on differences between suicidal and nonsuicidal self-harm, further efforts to develop reliable assessments of intent are required. Some advances have recently been made in this area [24].
Deliberate self-harm behavior may occur in clinical as well as in nonclinical samples [9], [10], [25], [26], [27]. DSM-IV and ICD-10 F list self-harm behavior as a diagnostic criterion of borderline personality disorder. However, individuals who self-harm are diagnostically heterogeneous and may suffer from a spectrum of other psychological disorders [28], [29]. Frequently reported co-occurring diagnoses—other than borderline personality disorder—are alcohol and substance abuse [29], [30]; eating disorders [31], [32], [33], [34]; dissociative, somatoform, or body dysmorphic disorders [35], [36], [37]; depression and anxiety disorders [26], [38], [39]; posttraumatic stress disorder [30], [40]; and several personality disorders and schizophrenia [2], [29]. In DSM-IV, self-harm behavior may also be classified as a disorder of impulse control not otherwise specified and ICD-10 has an additional Z code for a personal history of self-harm. Concealed self-harm carried out with the aim of adopting the sick role is classified as factitious disorder [13]. Within factitious disorders, indirect forms of self-harm prevail [41]. Studies indicate certain overlaps between factitious disorder and open (or admitted) self-harm behaviors, making the diagnostic categories not absolutely distinct empirically [6], [42], [43], [44].
In school and college student samples, lifetime prevalence of nonsuicidal self-harm behavior ranges from 13% to 35% [11], [45], [46], [47], [48]. Several population-based samples from the United States and Canada yield a prevalence of 4% pertaining to the past 6 months and lifetime prevalence figures ranging from 2.2% to 6% [49], [50], [51]. Deliberate self-harm behavior is particularly prevalent in patients in psychosomatic medicine and psychiatric settings, including consultation–liaison patients [29], [52], [53], [54].
Generally, the relation between a factor and an illness is probabilistic, not deterministic. Therefore, the term risk factors is more often preferred over the term causal factors. Kraemer et al. [55] define risk factor as a measurable variable that must precede the outcome and be associated with a higher risk of developing the outcome. They distinguish between risk factors of first onset and those of a relapse and—inversely—factors raising the probability of a remission. Knowledge of these factors is relevant for the aims of primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention and for therapy. According to Kraemer et al. [55], a factor that has a correlation with an outcome, with both variables being assessed at the same time, should merely be termed a correlate. Kraemer argues that although a given factor may indeed be a risk factor, it might also be an accompanying condition or a consequence of the illness. To term a variable risk factor, it must be assessed before the outcome occurs.
Distal and proximal factors are distinguished depending on the proximity between factors and outcome. This is often operationalized along a time axis [56], with distal factors arising earlier in the biography and proximal factors nearer to illness onset. The terms distal and proximal are merely descriptive. Another aspect concerns the paths of effect. In a cause-and-effect chain, distal factors are supposed to have more indirect effects and proximal factors more direct effects on the outcome [57]. More specifically, diathesis-stress models define distal as predisposing factors, which are those that make the individual vulnerable to stress, such as parental problems or childhood traumata. Thus, in predisposed individuals, proximal factors may trigger the onset of mental or behavioral problems. Proximal factors are composed of daily hassles, conflicts, acute stress, life events, or traumata closely prior to illness onset.
Transactional models emphasize that risk factors can transact with each other as well as with the behavior itself [58]. While some risk factors are largely considered static, like a history of childhood trauma or personality traits, others are more often considered dynamic, like changing mood states or the current course of events. More recent approaches underscore the variability of risk factors over time, rather than assume that the risk factors remain valid indefinitely [58].
Risk factors may be inherent in the person or in the environment. Accordingly, protective factors can be personal resources (resilience) or social resources [59].
According to the salutogenic approach, when a person faces stress, protective factors diminish the risk of developing a disease [60]. Identifying protective factors is relevant, provided they can be modified and enhanced by interventions.
Well-known models of the interaction between risk and protective factors are the compensation model, which claims that a protective factor simply has an additive positive effect on health and thereby compensates the negative effect of risk factors [59], and the protective factors model, which claims that a protective factor must moderate the association between risk factor and outcome [61], [62].
Although there are some excellent reviews on deliberate self-harm behavior [1], [2], [3], we believe that we have added to this knowledge in several ways. In contrast to earlier reviews that give a comprehensive overview [3] or focus on the functions of self-harm [1], [2], our review elucidates on the possible factors in the etiology of deliberate self-harm that have been empirically investigated. Since Gratz's 2003 review on risk factors and functions of deliberate self-harm [1], a considerable number of self-harm studies have been published, thus making an updated review expedient. Moreover, other than Gratz's 2003 review, which focused on childhood traumatic experiences and emotion regulation as possible factors [1], our review focuses on a broader range of empirically investigated sociodemographic and psychological factors. Additionally, we evaluate each risk factor or correlate in terms of the methodological strength of the available evidence and infer open research issues that need to be addressed.
Our review focuses on sociodemographic and psychological factors. Although several studies also yield associations between deliberate self-harm and alcohol or other substance abuse, binge eating, or restricted eating, we will not include this information. One reason for this is that substance abuse and disturbed eating may indicate co-occurring disorders. As a result, the question of correlates or risk factors would be strongly linked with the question of diagnostic comorbidity proper. A second reason is that substance abuse and disturbed eating are in themselves behavior with a strong inherent element of self-harm. This makes it a much more complex issue than just treating substance abuse and disturbed eating as correlates or risk factors. In our view, the relation between deliberate self-harm with alcohol or substance abuse and disturbed eating behaviors, in particular, deserves investigating in more detail than this review would allow.
Section snippets
Research strategies
We searched Medline, PsycINFO, and PSYNDEX (German psychological literature) for the keywords [“self-harm” OR “self-injur⁎” OR “self-cut⁎” OR “self-destruct⁎” OR “auto-mutilat⁎” OR “auto-destruct⁎”] combined with [“risk facto⁎” OR “correlate⁎” OR “precurs⁎” OR “predict⁎” OR “causal facto⁎”]. We also searched reference lists. We included studies that adopt the definition of deliberate self-harm as self-induced bodily harm without conscious suicidal intent [1]. Studies on suicidal behavior or
Study design
Only 5 of the 59 original studies test predictors of deliberate self-harm in a longitudinal design [23], [69], [85], [90], [109]. They each include two time points of measurement, with intervals ranging from 6 months to 10 years. Three of the longitudinal studies [23], [69], [90] investigated patients who were medically treated for deliberate self-harm at t1. The predicted criterion at t2 was not new onset but recurrence of deliberate self-harm. In a Finnish epidemiological study [109], a
Discussion
We reviewed empirical studies on correlates and potential risk factors of nonsuicidal, deliberate, self-harm behavior. We included studies that were in accordance with an accepted definition of deliberate self-harm behavior [1]. However, we considered some studies on suicidal behavior if they also included nonsuicidal self-harm behavior.
Sociodemographic and many other distal and proximal correlates of deliberate self-harm could be identified. There were few longitudinal studies, but such
Conclusions for research
Knowledge on correlates and risk factors is important in order to better predict, understand, and treat deliberate self-harm behavior. Future research should include (a) longitudinal studies; (b) a psychometrically sound assessment of deliberate self-harm; (c) proximal stress factors (life events, stress, daily hassles, or situational triggers) that occur prior to the onset of deliberate self-harm; (d) the coping with stress dimension; (e) the potential role of social resources; (f) models that
References (118)
The functions of deliberate self-injury: a review of the evidence
Clin Psychol Rev
(2007)Self-harm
Lancet
(2005)The challenge of self-mutilation: a review
Compr Psychiatry
(1988)- et al.
Self-injurious behavior: differential diagnosis and functional differentiation
Compr Psychiatry
(2007) - et al.
Deliberate self-harm patients who leave the accident and emergency department without a psychiatric assessment: a neglected population at risk
J Psychosom Res
(2001) - et al.
Factitious disorders and pathological self-harm in a hospital population: an interdisciplinary challenge
Gen Hosp Psychiatry
(2002) - et al.
Three assessment tools for deliberate self-harm and suicide behavior: evaluation and psychopathological correlates
J Psychosom Res
(2006) - et al.
Reported childhood trauma, attempted suicide and self-mutilative behavior among women in the general population
Eur Psychiatry
(2005) - et al.
Self-mutilation in substance-dependent patients and relationship with childhood abuse and neglect, alexithymia and temperament and character dimensions of personality
Drug Alchol Depend
(2005) - et al.
Impulsivity in self-mutilative behavior: psychometric and biological findings
J Psychiatr Res
(1997)
Problems reported by self-harm patients. Perception, hopelessness, and suicidal intent
J Psychosom Res
Case-control study of unemployment and parasuicide
Compr Psychiatry
Self-mutilating behaviour of psychiatric inpatients
Eur Psychiatry
Risk factors for and functions of deliberate self-harm: an empirical and conceptual review
Clin Psychol
Self-mutilation: culture, contexts, and nursing responses
J Clin Nurs
The coming of age of self-mutilation
J Nerv Ment Dis
Cognitive–behavioral treatment of borderline personality disorder
Attitudes of doctors and nurses to self-poisoning patients
Soc Sci Med
Personality disorder and self-wounding
Br J Psychiatry
Self injurious behaviour
Acta Psychiatr Scand
Measurement of deliberate self-harm: preliminary data on the deliberate self-harm inventory
J Psychopathol Behav
Self-injurious behavior: a review of the behavior and biology of self-mutilation
Am J Psychiatry
The Self-harm Inventory (SHI): development of a scale for identifying self-destructive behaviors and borderline personality disorder
J Clin Psychol
The deliberate self-harm syndrome
Am J Psychiatry
Suicide after deliberate self-harm: a 4-year cohort study
Am J Psychiatry
Completed suicide after a suicide attempt: a 37-year follow-up study
Am J Psychiatry
Mental disorders and suicide in Northern Ireland
Br J Psychiatry
Meanings of gender and suicidal behavior during adolescence
Suicide Life-Threat
Repetition of deliberate self-harm and subsequent suicide risk: long-term follow-up study of 11583 patients
Br J Psychiatry
Reasons for suicide attempts and nonsuicidal self-injury in women with borderline personality disorder
J Abnorm Psychol
The repetition of suicidal behavior: a multicenter cohort study
J Clin Psychiatry
Suicide Attempt Self-Injury Interview (SASII): development, reliability, and validity of a scale to assess suicide attempts and intentional self-injury
Psychol Assess
Subclinical self-harm: range of behaviors, extent, and associated characteristics
Am J Orthopsychiatry
Deliberate self-harm in a nonclinical population: prevalence and psychological correlates
Am J Psychiatry
Repetitive skin-cutting: parental bonding, personality and gender
Psychol Psychother
Self-injury: a research review for the practitioner
J Clin Psychol
Clinical correlates of self-mutilation among psychiatric inpatients
Ann Clin Psychiatry
Self-harm and suicidal behavior in women with comorbid PTSD and substance dependence
Am J Addict
Self-mutilation and eating disorders
Suicide Life-Threat
Aggressiveness, anger and eating disorders: a review
Psychopathology
Self-injurious behaviors in a college population
Pediatrics
Self-injurious behavior in women with eating disorders
Am J Psychiatry
Childhood trauma, dissociation, and self-harming behaviour: a pilot study
Br J Med Psychol
Skin picking as a symptom of body dysmorphic disorder
Psychopharmacol Bull
Depersonalization disorder and self-injurious behavior
J Clin Psychiatry
Self-mutilation and symptoms of depression, anxiety, and borderline personality disorder
Suicide Life-Threat
A study of the frequency of self-mutilation in a community sample of adolescents
J Youth Adolesc
Current posttraumatic stress disorder and history of trauma in trichotillomania
J Clin Psychol
Autodestructive syndromes: a literature review
Psychother Psychosom
The spectrum of factitious disorders
Clinical practice No. 40
Cited by (323)
Exploring gender differences in risk factors for self-harm in adolescents using data from the Millennium Cohort Study
2024, Journal of Affective DisordersAn exploration of the association between family functioning and nonsuicidal self-injury among Chinese adolescents with mood disorders
2024, European Journal of PsychiatryCorrelates of informant discrepancies in self-harm among youth involved in child protective services
2023, Children and Youth Services ReviewConfirmatory factor analysis of Acute Suicidal Affective Disturbance in a sample of treatment-seeking eating disorder patients
2023, Journal of Affective DisordersRisk of repeat self-harm and suicide death following an episode of hospital self-harm presentation among adolescents and young adults
2023, Journal of Affective Disorders