Bullied Children and Psychosomatic Problems: A Meta-analysis
TL;DR: Given that school bullying is a widespread phenomenon in many countries around the world, the present results indicate that bullying should be considered a significant international public health problem.
Abstract: BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: A previous meta-analysis showed that being bullied during childhood is related to psychosomatic problems, but many other studies have been published since then, including some longitudinal studies. We performed a new meta-analysis to quantify the association between peer victimization and psychosomatic complaints in the school-aged population. METHODS: We searched online databases up to April 2012, and bibliographies of retrieved studies and of narrative reviews, for studies that examined the association between being bullied and psychosomatic complaints in children and adolescents. The original search identified 119 nonduplicated studies, of which 30 satisfied the prestated inclusion criteria. RESULTS: Two separate random effects meta-analyses were performed on 6 longitudinal studies (odds ratio = 2.39, 95% confidence interval, 1.76 to 3.24) and 24 cross-sectional studies (odds ratio = 2.17, 95% confidence interval, 1.91 to 2.46), respectively. Results showed that bullied children and adolescents have a significantly higher risk for psychosomatic problems than non-bullied agemates. In the cross-sectional studies, the magnitude of effect size significantly decreased with the increase of the proportion of female participants in the study sample. No other moderators were statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: The association between being bullied and psychosomatic problems was confirmed. Given that school bullying is a widespread phenomenon in many countries around the world, the present results indicate that bullying should be considered a significant international public health problem.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: The importance of bullying by peers as a major risk factor for poor physical and mental health and reduced adaptation to adult roles including forming lasting relationships, integrating into work and being economically independent is considered.
Abstract: Bullying is the systematic abuse of power and is defined as aggressive behaviour or intentional harm-doing by peers that is carried out repeatedly and involves an imbalance of power. Being bullied is still often wrongly considered as a ‘normal rite of passage’. This review considers the importance of bullying as a major risk factor for poor physical and mental health and reduced adaptation to adult roles including forming lasting relationships, integrating into work and being economically independent. Bullying by peers has been mostly ignored by health professionals but should be considered as a significant risk factor and safeguarding issue.
456 citations
TL;DR: It is suggested that effective bullying prevention and intervention efforts must take into account the complexities of the human experience, addressing both individual characteristics and history of involvement in bullying, risk and protective factors, and the contexts in which bullying occurs, in order to promote healthier social relationships.
Abstract: With growing recognition that bullying is a complex phenomenon, influenced by multiple factors, research findings to date have been understood within a social-ecological framework. Consistent with this model, we review research on the known correlates and contributing factors in bullying/victimization within the individual, family, peer group, school and community. Recognizing the fluid and dynamic nature of involvement in bullying, we then expand on this model and consider research on the consequences of bullying involvement, as either victim or bully or both, and propose a social-ecological, diathesis-stress model for understanding the bullying dynamic and its impact. Specifically, we frame involvement in bullying as a stressful life event for both children who bully and those who are victimized, serving as a catalyst for a diathesis-stress connection between bullying, victimization, and psychosocial difficulties. Against this backdrop, we suggest that effective bullying prevention and intervention efforts must take into account the complexities of the human experience, addressing both individual characteristics and history of involvement in bullying, risk and protective factors, and the contexts in which bullying occurs, in order to promote healthier social relationships.
438 citations
Cites background from "Bullied Children and Psychosomatic ..."
...Being bullied by peers (victimization) has been linked with poor physical health (e.g., Gini & Pozzoli, 2013; Knack, Jensen-Campbell, & Baum, 2011) and poor school adjustment, including being unhappy, feeling unsafe, being truant, performing poorly and, in some cases, dropping out of school (e.g.,…...
[...]
TL;DR: A positive overall effect is indicated, supporting the hypothesis that moral disengagement is a significant correlate of aggressive behavior among children and youth.
Abstract: A growing body of research has demonstrated consistent links between Bandura's theory of moral disengagement and aggressive behavior in adults. The present meta-analysis was conducted to summarize the existing literature on the relation between moral disengagement and different types of aggressive behavior among school-age children and adolescents. Twenty-seven independent samples with a total of 17,776 participants (aged 8-18 years) were included in the meta-analysis. Results indicated a positive overall effect (r = .28, 95% CI [.23, .32]), supporting the hypothesis that moral disengagement is a significant correlate of aggressive behavior among children and youth. Analyses of a priori moderators revealed that effect sizes were larger for adolescents as compared to children, for studies that used a revised version of the original Bandura scale, and for studies with shared method variance. Effect sizes did not vary as a function of type of aggressive behavior, gender, or publication status. Results are discussed within the extant literature on moral disengagement and future directions are proposed. Aggr. Behav. 9999:XX-XX, 2013. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Language: en
394 citations
Cites background from "Bullied Children and Psychosomatic ..."
...…Coie, & Lynam, 2006) and has been shown to be a significant correlate, both concurrently and longitudinally, of poor health and maladjustment in both perpetrators and victims (e.g., Card, Stucky, Sawalani, & Little, 2008; Gini & Pozzoli, 2009, 2013; Ttofi, Farrington, Losel, & Loeber, 2011)....
[...]
TL;DR: In this article, a systematic review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses on the topic of bullying and cyberbullying is presented, showing that one of every three children is involved in some forms of bullying.
298 citations
TL;DR: A comprehensive and extensive systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of bullying prevention programs is presented in this article, showing that anti-bullying programs significantly reduce bullying perpetration and bullying victimization.
276 citations
References
More filters
TL;DR: A new quantity is developed, I 2, which the authors believe gives a better measure of the consistency between trials in a meta-analysis, which is susceptible to the number of trials included in the meta- analysis.
Abstract: Cochrane Reviews have recently started including the quantity I 2 to help readers assess the consistency of the results of studies in meta-analyses. What does this new quantity mean, and why is assessment of heterogeneity so important to clinical practice?
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses can provide convincing and reliable evidence relevant to many aspects of medicine and health care.1 Their value is especially clear when the results of the studies they include show clinically important effects of similar magnitude. However, the conclusions are less clear when the included studies have differing results. In an attempt to establish whether studies are consistent, reports of meta-analyses commonly present a statistical test of heterogeneity. The test seeks to determine whether there are genuine differences underlying the results of the studies (heterogeneity), or whether the variation in findings is compatible with chance alone (homogeneity). However, the test is susceptible to the number of trials included in the meta-analysis. We have developed a new quantity, I 2, which we believe gives a better measure of the consistency between trials in a meta-analysis.
Assessment of the consistency of effects across studies is an essential part of meta-analysis. Unless we know how consistent the results of studies are, we cannot determine the generalisability of the findings of the meta-analysis. Indeed, several hierarchical systems for grading evidence state that the results of studies must be consistent or homogeneous to obtain the highest grading.2–4
Tests for heterogeneity are commonly used to decide on methods for combining studies and for concluding consistency or inconsistency of findings.5 6 But what does the test achieve in practice, and how should the resulting P values be interpreted?
A test for heterogeneity examines the null hypothesis that all studies are evaluating the same effect. The usual test statistic …
45,105 citations
TL;DR: A checklist contains specifications for reporting of meta-analyses of observational studies in epidemiology, including background, search strategy, methods, results, discussion, and conclusion should improve the usefulness ofMeta-an analyses for authors, reviewers, editors, readers, and decision makers.
Abstract: ObjectiveBecause of the pressure for timely, informed decisions in public health
and clinical practice and the explosion of information in the scientific literature,
research results must be synthesized. Meta-analyses are increasingly used
to address this problem, and they often evaluate observational studies. A
workshop was held in Atlanta, Ga, in April 1997, to examine the reporting
of meta-analyses of observational studies and to make recommendations to aid
authors, reviewers, editors, and readers.ParticipantsTwenty-seven participants were selected by a steering committee, based
on expertise in clinical practice, trials, statistics, epidemiology, social
sciences, and biomedical editing. Deliberations of the workshop were open
to other interested scientists. Funding for this activity was provided by
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.EvidenceWe conducted a systematic review of the published literature on the
conduct and reporting of meta-analyses in observational studies using MEDLINE,
Educational Research Information Center (ERIC), PsycLIT, and the Current Index
to Statistics. We also examined reference lists of the 32 studies retrieved
and contacted experts in the field. Participants were assigned to small-group
discussions on the subjects of bias, searching and abstracting, heterogeneity,
study categorization, and statistical methods.Consensus ProcessFrom the material presented at the workshop, the authors developed a
checklist summarizing recommendations for reporting meta-analyses of observational
studies. The checklist and supporting evidence were circulated to all conference
attendees and additional experts. All suggestions for revisions were addressed.ConclusionsThe proposed checklist contains specifications for reporting of meta-analyses
of observational studies in epidemiology, including background, search strategy,
methods, results, discussion, and conclusion. Use of the checklist should
improve the usefulness of meta-analyses for authors, reviewers, editors, readers,
and decision makers. An evaluation plan is suggested and research areas are
explored.
17,663 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, an adjusted rank correlation test is proposed as a technique for identifying publication bias in a meta-analysis, and its operating characteristics are evaluated via simulations, and the test statistic is a direct statistical analogue of the popular funnel-graph.
Abstract: An adjusted rank correlation test is proposed as a technique for identifying publication bias in a meta-analysis, and its operating characteristics are evaluated via simulations. The test statistic is a direct statistical analogue of the popular "funnel-graph." The number of component studies in the meta-analysis, the nature of the selection mechanism, the range of variances of the effect size estimates, and the true underlying effect size are all observed to be influential in determining the power of the test. The test is fairly powerful for large meta-analyses with 75 component studies, but has only moderate power for meta-analyses with 25 component studies. However, in many of the configurations in which there is low power, there is also relatively little bias in the summary effect size estimate. Nonetheless, the test must be interpreted with caution in small meta-analyses. In particular, bias cannot be ruled out if the test is not significant. The proposed technique has potential utility as an exploratory tool for meta-analysts, as a formal procedure to complement the funnel-graph.
13,373 citations
TL;DR: Quantitative procedures for computing the tolerance for filed and future null results are reported and illustrated, and the implications are discussed.
Abstract: For any given research area, one cannot tell how many studies have been conducted but never reported. The extreme view of the "file drawer problem" is that journals are filled with the 5% of the studies that show Type I errors, while the file drawers are filled with the 95% of the studies that show nonsignificant results. Quantitative procedures for computing the tolerance for filed and future null results are reported and illustrated, and the implications are discussed. (15 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
7,159 citations
22 Jan 1983
TL;DR: In this paper, a fail-safe TV for effect size was introduced, which is based on the Stouffer method, which was first proposed by Rosenthal in 1979 to evaluate the threat posed by sampling bias in the literature search.
Abstract: Rosenthan's (1979) concept of fail-safe N has thus far been applied to probability levels exclusively. This note introduces a fail-safe TV for effect size. Rosenthal's (1979) fail-safe N was an ingenious response to the so-called file drawer problem in research integration, in that it provided a direct assessment of the threat posed by sampling bias in the literature search. The algorithm was derived from the Stouffer method (Mosteller & Bush, 1954), in which an overall Z-score is computed by summing individual Z-scores and dividing by the square root of the number of scores. A significant overall Z-score, Rosenthal reasoned, could be made nonsignificant by adding some knowable number of hypothetical studies that averaged null results. The exact number of such studies needed to bring a significant overall p level up to some critical level (e.g., .05) has since become known as the fail-safe N (Nfs). The formula is
1,718 citations