Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

A comparison between clinicians' assessment and the Manchester Self‐Harm Rule: a cohort study

By Jayne Cooper, Navneet Kapur and Kevin Mackway‐Jones

Abstract

As identifying patients at risk of subsequent suicidal behaviour is a key goal of assessment, a cohort study of presentations to five emergency departments following episodes of self‐harm was carried out. We compared the accuracy of the prediction of subsequent self‐harm within 6 months between global clinical assessments and the Manchester Self‐harm Rule. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Global clinical assessments and the rule had a sensitivity of 85% (CI 83 to 87) versus 94% (CI 92% to 95%), specificity of 38% (CI 37% to 39%) versus 26% (CI 24% to 27%), a positive predictive value of 22% (CI 21% to 23%) versus 21% (CI 19% to 21%) and a negative predictive value of 92% (CI 91% to 93%) versus 96% (CI 94% to 96%). The accuracy of predicting short‐term repetition of self‐harm by clinicians could be improved by incorporating this simple rule into their assessment

Topics: Short Report
Publisher: BMJ Group
OAI identifier: oai:pubmedcentral.nih.gov:2658442
Provided by: PubMed Central
Download PDF:
Sorry, we are unable to provide the full text but you may find it at the following location(s):
  • http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.g... (external link)
  • Suggested articles


    To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.