Advancements in the understanding and prevention of self-injurious thoughts and behaviors (SITBs) are urgently needed. Intensive longitudinal data collection methods—such as ecological momentary assessment—capture fine-grained, “real-world” information about SITBs as they occur and thus have the potential to narrow this gap. However, collecting real-time data on SITBs presents complex ethical and practical considerations, including about whether and how to monitor and respond to incoming information about SITBs from suicidal or self-injuring individuals during the study. We conducted a systematic review of protocols for monitoring and responding to incoming data in previous and ongoing intensive longitudinal studies of SITBs. Across the 61 included unique studies/samples, there was no clear most common approach to managing these ethical and safety considerations. For example, studies were fairly evenly split between either using automated notifications triggered by specific survey responses (e.g., indicating current suicide risk) or monitoring and intervening upon (generally with a phone-based risk assessment) incoming responses (36%), using both automated notifications and monitoring/intervening (35%), or neither using automated notifications nor monitoring/intervening (29%). Certain study characteristics appeared to influence the safety practices used. Future research that systematically evaluates optimal, feasible strategies for managing risk in real-time monitoring research on SITBs is needed.

迫切需要提高对自伤思想和行为（SITB）的理解和预防。密集的纵向数据收集方法（例如生态瞬时评估）可以在 SITB 发生时捕获细粒度的“真实世界”信息，从而有可能缩小这一差距。然而，收集有关 SITB 的实时数据提出了复杂的伦理和实际考虑，包括在研究期间是否以及如何监测和响应来自自杀或自残个体的 SITB 信息。我们对先前和正在进行的 SITB 深入纵向研究中的监测和响应传入数据的方案进行了系统审查。在 61 项独特的研究/样本中，没有明确的最常见方法来管理这些道德和安全考虑因素。例如，研究在使用由特定调查响应触发的自动通知（例如，表明当前的自杀风险）或监控和干预（通常使用基于电话的风险评估）传入响应之间相当均匀（36%），同时使用这两种方法自动通知和监控/干预（35%），或者既不使用自动通知也不监控/干预（29%）。某些研究特征似乎会影响所使用的安全实践。未来的研究需要系统地评估 SITB 实时监测研究中风险管理的最佳、可行策略。