BULLYING PREVENTION: A CALL FOR COLLABORATIVE EFFORTS BETWEEN SCHOOL NURSES AND SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGISTS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bullying among children and adolescents is recognized as a significant global public health problem, as it has serious health consequences. Schools are important sites in which to address violence prevention, specifically bullying prevention, and to promote positive youth development. The Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion outlines five action points (building healthy public policy, creating supportive environments, strengthening community actions, developing personal skills, and reorienting health services) that should be considered when creating a positive school climate focused on health promotion. Using the position statements of school nurses and school psychologists, we outline their complementary roles in bullying prevention and intervention. In addition, because the global and national school health models call for building partnerships and enhancing communication among professionals within the schools and with the community to achieve health goals, we discuss how these two professional groups can work collaboratively to address bullying as a school health issue.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.066 | 0.069 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.029 |
| Research integrity | 0.019 | 0.034 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.004 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".