{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.033707865168539325, 'fraction_numerical': 0.003121098626716604, 'mean_word_length': 5.596707818930041, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 2, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Evaluation of a novel risk assessment method for self-harm associated with Borderline Personality Disorder

Objectives: Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is associated with frequent self-harm and suicidal behaviours. This study compared physician-assessed self-harm risk and intervention choice according to a (i) standard risk assessment and (ii) BPD-specific risk assessment methods. Methods: Forty-five junior and senior mental health physicians were assigned to standard or BPD-specific risk training groups. The assessment utilized a BPD case vignette containing four scenarios describing high/low lethality self-harm and chronic/new patterns of self-harm behaviour. Participants chose from among four interventions, each corresponding to a risk category. Results: Standard and BPD-specific groups were alike in their assessment of self-harm risk. Divergence occurred on intervention choice for assessments of low lethality, chronic risk (p<.01) and high lethality, chronic risk (p<.005). Overall, psychiatrists were more likely than their junior colleagues to correctly assess risk and management options. Conclusions: Although standard and BPD-specific methods are well aligned for assessing self harm-associated risk, BPD-specific training raised awareness of BPD-appropriate interventions, particularly in the context of chronic patterns of self-harm behaviour. Wider dissemination of BPD-specific risk training may enhance the confidence of mental health clinicians in identifying the nature of self-harm risk as well as the most clinically appropriate interventions for clients with BPD.