MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2578064980 · doi:10.1177/0706743716684793

Cyberbullying Prevention and Intervention Efforts: Current Knowledge and Future Directions

2016· review· en· W2578064980 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBullying, Victimization, and Aggression
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)CurriculumPsychologySocial mediaMedical educationMental healthHealth careMedicinePedagogyPolitical sciencePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bullying is a serious public health concern that is associated with significant negative mental, social, and physical outcomes. Technological advances have increased adolescents' use of social media, and online communication platforms have exposed adolescents to another mode of bullying- cyberbullying. Prevention and intervention materials, from websites and tip sheets to classroom curriculum, have been developed to help youth, parents, and teachers address cyberbullying. While youth and parents are willing to disclose their experiences with bullying to their health care providers, these disclosures need to be taken seriously and handled in a caring manner. Health care providers need to include questions about bullying on intake forms to encourage these disclosures. The aim of this article is to examine the current status of cyberbullying prevention and intervention. Research support for several school-based intervention programs is summarised. Recommendations for future research are provided.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.972

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.318 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it