Antibullying Interventions in Schools: Assessing the Evidence Base.

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES Psychiatric services Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-13 DOI:10.1176/appi.ps.20230541
Preethy George, John Cosgrove, Jeffrey Taylor, Neha Rao, Tina Marshall, Sushmita Shoma Ghose, Nikhil A Patel
{"title":"Antibullying Interventions in Schools: Assessing the Evidence Base.","authors":"Preethy George, John Cosgrove, Jeffrey Taylor, Neha Rao, Tina Marshall, Sushmita Shoma Ghose, Nikhil A Patel","doi":"10.1176/appi.ps.20230541","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This systematic review used established rating criteria to describe the level of evidence for interventions aimed at preventing or reducing bullying perpetration and victimization in schools, synthesized the evidence for students from racially and ethnically diverse backgrounds, and reviewed the literature for available information to conduct an economic analysis of the interventions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Major databases, gray literature, and evidence-base registries were searched to identify studies published from 2008 through 2022. The authors rated antibullying intervention models as having high, moderate, or low evidence depending on the number and rigor of studies with positive findings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, 80 articles reporting on 71 original research studies describing a total of 48 antibullying interventions met the inclusion criteria for this review. Two schoolwide interventions received a high-evidence rating: the KiVa (<i>Kiusaamista Vastaan</i>) Antibullying Program and the Friendly Schools program. Multilevel interventions with components at the levels of school, classroom, and individual student most consistently showed strong evidence for reducing bullying behavior in elementary and middle school grades. Four interventions yielded positive effects in reducing bullying and victimization among diverse samples of students.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Antibullying interventions can reduce bullying in schools. Some interventions show effectiveness with students from racially and ethnically diverse backgrounds. The gains relative to per-student costs were in the range that is considered cost-effective. Most implementation costs are spent on staff training and support. Research on successful implementation of whole-school interventions and additional synthesis of evidence pertaining to program structures would further advance the antibullying evidence base.</p>","PeriodicalId":20878,"journal":{"name":"Psychiatric services","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychiatric services","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.20230541","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This systematic review used established rating criteria to describe the level of evidence for interventions aimed at preventing or reducing bullying perpetration and victimization in schools, synthesized the evidence for students from racially and ethnically diverse backgrounds, and reviewed the literature for available information to conduct an economic analysis of the interventions.

Methods: Major databases, gray literature, and evidence-base registries were searched to identify studies published from 2008 through 2022. The authors rated antibullying intervention models as having high, moderate, or low evidence depending on the number and rigor of studies with positive findings.

Results: Overall, 80 articles reporting on 71 original research studies describing a total of 48 antibullying interventions met the inclusion criteria for this review. Two schoolwide interventions received a high-evidence rating: the KiVa (Kiusaamista Vastaan) Antibullying Program and the Friendly Schools program. Multilevel interventions with components at the levels of school, classroom, and individual student most consistently showed strong evidence for reducing bullying behavior in elementary and middle school grades. Four interventions yielded positive effects in reducing bullying and victimization among diverse samples of students.

Conclusions: Antibullying interventions can reduce bullying in schools. Some interventions show effectiveness with students from racially and ethnically diverse backgrounds. The gains relative to per-student costs were in the range that is considered cost-effective. Most implementation costs are spent on staff training and support. Research on successful implementation of whole-school interventions and additional synthesis of evidence pertaining to program structures would further advance the antibullying evidence base.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
学校反欺凌干预措施:评估证据基础。
目的:本系统性综述使用既定的评级标准来描述旨在预防或减少校园欺凌行为和伤害的干预措施的证据水平,综合了针对来自不同种族和民族背景的学生的证据,并审查了文献中的可用信息,以便对干预措施进行经济分析:方法:作者检索了主要数据库、灰色文献和证据基础登记处,以确定从 2008 年到 2022 年发表的研究。作者根据有积极发现的研究的数量和严谨性,将反欺凌干预模式分为高、中、低证据等级:总体而言,80 篇文章报告了 71 项原创研究,共描述了 48 种反欺凌干预措施,符合本综述的纳入标准。两项全校范围的干预措施获得了高证据评级:KiVa(Kiusaamista Vastaan)反欺凌计划和友好学校计划。由学校、班级和学生个人三个层面组成的多层次干预措施在减少小学和初中年级的欺凌行为方面始终显示出强有力的证据。四项干预措施在减少不同学生样本中的欺凌和受害行为方面产生了积极效果:结论:反欺凌干预措施可以减少校园欺凌行为。一些干预措施对来自不同种族和民族背景的学生有效。相对于每名学生的成本而言,其收益在被认为具有成本效益的范围内。大部分实施成本用于员工培训和支持。对全校干预措施的成功实施进行研究,并对与计划结构相关的证据进行更多综合,将进一步推动反欺凌证据库的发展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Psychiatric services
Psychiatric services 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
7.90%
发文量
295
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Psychiatric Services, established in 1950, is published monthly by the American Psychiatric Association. The peer-reviewed journal features research reports on issues related to the delivery of mental health services, especially for people with serious mental illness in community-based treatment programs. Long known as an interdisciplinary journal, Psychiatric Services recognizes that provision of high-quality care involves collaboration among a variety of professionals, frequently working as a team. Authors of research reports published in the journal include psychiatrists, psychologists, pharmacists, nurses, social workers, drug and alcohol treatment counselors, economists, policy analysts, and professionals in related systems such as criminal justice and welfare systems. In the mental health field, the current focus on patient-centered, recovery-oriented care and on dissemination of evidence-based practices is transforming service delivery systems at all levels. Research published in Psychiatric Services contributes to this transformation.
期刊最新文献
A Lived Experience Perspective in Suicide Prevention Research. State Policy Strategies for the Workforce Emergency in Behavioral Health. Employment Experiences and Employability of People in China Living With Schizophrenia: A Qualitative Study. Recovery Coach Program Implementation Across an Integrated Health System. Influenza and COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake Among Individuals With Versus Without Diagnosed Psychiatric Disorders.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1