Evidence Hub

Mediating and moderating variables in the prediction of self-harm in young people: A systematic review of prospective longitudinal studies

M. Abdelraheem, J. McAloon, F. Shand

Journal of Affective Disorders, 2019

36 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Self-harm is widespread amongst young people. A growing body of research has explored factors that predict self-harm in young people, however, a systematic review of mediators and moderators of those factors has not yet been offered. This review aims to fill this gap by synthesising research about mediators and moderators of factors that prospectively predict self-harm in young people.

METHOD

A systematic review of research trials published up until 2018 was undertaken. Electronic databases Scopus (Elsevier), CINAHL, PsychINFO (EBSCO) and Medline were searched. Included studies utilised prospective longitudinal designs with participants aged 25 years or younger and self-harm outcome measures with published or reported psychometric properties. The aim of the review was to identify mediators and moderators of factors that predict self-harm in young people.

RESULTS

Of the 25 studies that met inclusion criteria, 22 reported at least one positive finding of a mediator or moderator. Specifically, 15 significant mediators and 20 significant moderators were identified in relation to a broad range of predictors of self-harm. Predictors were classified as adverse childhood experiences and parenting factors, psychological and psychiatric factors, social factors and intrapersonal factors. A number of potentially modifiable mediators and moderators were identified including interpersonal difficulties, impulsivity, self-esteem and self-compassion. Gender was the most commonly…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free