The longitudinal course of childhood bullying victimization and associations with self‐injurious thoughts and behaviors in children and young people: A systematic review of the literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Bullying victimization has consistently been highlighted as a risk factor for self-injurious thoughts and behaviors (SITBs) in young people. This systematic review of prospective, community-based studies explored associations between bullying victimization (traditional/face-to-face and cyber) across the full spectrum of self-harm and suicidality, in children and young people aged up to (and including) 25 years. Importantly, associations by sex/gender were explored. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Scopus were searched for articles meeting the inclusion criteria. Articles were screened by title, abstract and full text. Quality appraisal was performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cohort studies. Data were synthesized narratively. The protocol is registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021261916) and followed PRISMA 2020 guidelines. RESULTS: A total of 35 papers were included, across 17 countries. Results were presented by bullying type: traditional/face-to-face (n = 25), cyber (n = 7) and/or an aggregate of both types (n = 7). Outcomes included suicidal ideation (n = 17), self-harm (n = 10), suicide attempt (n = 4), NSSI (n = 4), other (n = 7). Studies measured outcomes in under 18s (n = 24), 18-25-year-olds (n = 8) and both under 18s and 18-25-year-olds (n = 3). Studies exploring the role of sex/gender (20%) found some interesting nuances. CONCLUSIONS: Some weak to strong associations between bullying and SITBs were found yet conclusions are tentative due to study heterogeneity (e.g., methods used, conceptualizations and operationalisations of exposures/outcomes). Future research should address methodological issues raised in this review, and further explore gender differences in bullying, including by bullying sub-types (e.g., overt or relational) and victim status (e.g., victim or bully-victim).
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".