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 OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dorothy L. Espelage, Jun Sung Hong

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations136
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of PsychiatrySame topicBullying, Victimization, and AggressionFrench-language works237,207