MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3183523400 · doi:10.1177/08901171211034105

Evaluating Risk and Protective Factors for Suicidality and Self-Harm in Australian Adolescents With Traditional Bullying and Cyberbullying Victimizations

2021· article· en· W3183523400 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Health Promotion · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBullying, Victimization, and Aggression
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychiatryMental healthPoison controlPsychologyVictimisationClinical psychologyPopulationSuicide preventionInjury preventionSuicidal ideationMedicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To identify and compare important risk and protective factors associated with suicidality and self-harm among traditional bullying and cyberbullying victims aged 14-17-years in Australia. DESIGN: Cross-sectional population-based study. SETTING: Young Minds Matter, a nationwide survey in Australia. SUBJECTS: Adolescents aged 14-17-years (n = 2125). MEASURES: Suicidality and self-harm were outcome variables, and explanatory variables included sociodemographic factors (age, gender, country of birth, household income, location, family type), risk factors (parental distress, family functioning, family history of substance use, child substance use, mental disorder, psychosis, eating disorders, sexual activity) and protective factors (high self-esteem, positive mental health or resilience, school connectedness, sleep) among 2 types of bullying victims-traditional and cyber. Traditional bullying includes physical (hit, kick, push) or verbal (tease, rumors, threat, ignorance), and cyberbullying includes teasing messages/pictures via email, social medial using the internet and/or mobile phones. ANALYSIS: Bivariate analysis and binary logistic regression models. Statistical metrics include Hosmer-Lemeshow Goodness-of-Fit-test, VIF test, Linktest and ROC curve for model performance and fitness. RESULTS: Overall, 25.6% of adolescents were traditional bullying victims and 12% were cyberbullying victims. The percentages of suicidality (34.4% vs 21.6%) and self-harm (32.8% vs 22.3%) were higher in cyberbullying victims than in traditional bullying victims. Girls were more often bullied and likely to experience suicidal and self-harming behavior than boys. Parental distress, mental disorder and psychosis were found to be significantly associated with the increase risk for self-harm and suicidality among both bullying victims (p < 0.05). While, eating disorder and sexual activity increased the risk of suicidality in traditional bullying victims and self-harm in cyberbullying victims, respectively. Positive mental health/resilience and adequate sleep were found be significantly associated with decreased suicidality and self-harm in both bullying victims. CONCLUSION: Suicidality and self-harm were common in bullying victims. The findings highlight that the risk and protective factors associated with suicidality and self-harm among adolescent who experienced traditional and cyberbullying victimization should be considered for the promotion of effective self-harm and suicide prevention and intervention programs.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.497

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.304 · 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