Investigating the relationship between bullying involvement and self-harmful thoughts and behaviour in young people: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is a complex and inconsistent relationship between bullying involvement and self-harmful thoughts and behaviour (SHTB) in young people. This novel systematic review aims to establish key interacting, moderating and mediating variables associated with SHTB in young people involved in bullying. METHODS: The systematic review was registered with PROSPERO: CRD42020192023. A search was conducted (until February 2021) across databases: PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO (Ovid), Cochrane Library, Scopus (Elsevier), Web of Science, ERIC and CINAHL (EBSCOhost). Observational studies containing quantitative primary or secondary data analyses were included in the review, on the basis that they examined interactions, moderators, or mediators between bullying involvement and SHTB in young people. Versions of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale were used to assess risk of bias in the included studies. RESULTS: A total of 57 studies were included. Overall, 3 studies identified interactions, 25 studies identified moderators and 21 studies identified mediators. 9 studies identified moderator-mediators. The findings were categorised as either self-harmful thoughts or self-harmful behaviours and synthesised under the following themes: socio-demographic; depression; parental; personality/psychological; and social/environmental. LIMITATIONS: This review uncovered significant heterogeneity and a paucity of replicated studies in the field, therefore, tentative conclusions have been drawn. CONCLUSIONS: This comprehensive review highlights the key role of depression as a mediator between traditional/cyber victimisation and SHTB in young people. The moderating effects of gender on mediation models investigating the role of depression suggest the possibility that females involved in bullying may be at increased suicide risk.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".