- Terminology and measurement of self-harm ideation are inconsistent, risking overlooked subgroups; research should prioritise participatory approaches with clinicians and lived experience.
- Most studies (68%) used standardised instruments, notably PHQ-9 item 9 and EPDS item 10, especially in female perinatal samples.
- Publication output rose after 2013, concentrated in high-income Western countries, while explicit use of 'self-harm ideation' in titles remained low (10%).
Arch Suicide Res. 2026 Aug 21:1-33. doi: 10.1080/13811118.2026.2718277. Online ahead of print.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Attention has been given on the terminology used for suicidal behaviors, however, there is paucity of research on the terminology used for those with thoughts of self-harm and this is imposing a risk of overlooking sub-groups within the suicidality spectrum. This review therefore aimed to map the existing evidence on the conceptualization and measurement of self-harm ideation.
METHOD: A two-stage search strategy was employed. In stage one, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Web of Science Core Collection were searched were searched in June 2020 for records published from database inception onwards, using database-specific index terms and title/abstract keywords related to self-harm ideation/thoughts. In stage two (2020-2025), a targeted title only search was conducted to identify studies explicitly foregrounding self-harm ideation. Data were synthesized using descriptive narrative methods.
RESULTS: The majority of studies (68%) used standardized instruments, most commonly items embedded within broader mental health scales, particularly item 9 of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and item 10 of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) in female perinatal samples. A smaller number of studies used the Self-Injurious Thoughts and Behaviors Interview (SITBI) items assessing non-suicidal self-injury thoughts. Publication output increased substantially after 2013 and was largely concentrated in high-income Western countries. Across all years examined, explicit use of the terms self-harm ideation or thoughts in titles remained consistently low (10%).
CONCLUSIONS: Future research should prioritize participatory approaches involving clinicians and individuals with lived experience to refine the terminology surrounding self-harm ideation and support more accurate identification and targeted prevention strategies.
PMID:42626908 | DOI:10.1080/13811118.2026.2718277
Share Evidence Blueprint
Save to Google Notes
Search Google Scholar
Save as PDF
⭐ My Revision List
