Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36388377›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in public health2022

Cyberbullying definitions and measurements in children and adolescents: Summarizing 20 years of global efforts.

Wei Zhang, Shiqing Huang, Lawrence Lam, Richard Evans, Chengyan Zhu

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Anti-Bullying Measures and Initiatives in an Online Setting: Educator Survey.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Collisions and Perceptions of Cyberbullying: Comparison of Intergenerational Experiences.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Wei ZhangSchool of Medicine and Health Management, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Shiqing HuangSchool of Information Resource Management, Renmin University of China, Beijing, China.
Lawrence LamFaculty of Medicine, Macau University of Science and Technology, Macau, China.
Richard EvansFaculty of Computer Science, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada.
Chengyan ZhuSchool of Political Science and Public Administration, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite numerous instruments existing to assist in the measurement of specific cyberbullying behaviors or cyberbullying in general, it is still unclear their purpose, corresponding scenarios, and their effectiveness. This study, therefore, aims to provide a comprehensive review of academic efforts on cyberbullying definitions, measurements, and their effectiveness in children and adolescents in the past two decades. A systematic review was performed using ASReview, an open source machine learning systematic review system. Three bibliographic citation databases, including Web of Science core collection, PubMed, and EBSCO were adopted for all relevant literature published from January 2001 to August 2021. In total, twenty-five studies, mentioning seventeen cyberbullying measurement scales, met the study collection criteria. The results found that most failed to provide a clear definition of cyberbullying, often providing unclear and inconsistent descriptions for the youth. Similarly, studies found it difficult to clearly reflect the three key elements of bullying, namely: harmfulness, repetitiveness, and the power imbalance between bullies and victims. With regard to cyberbullying types, most presented two or three categories, including victimization, perpetration, and bystanding, while some suggested four types based on the nature of the cyberbullying behavior, including written or verbal, visual or sexual, character impersonation, and exclusion. If characteristics are considered, cyberbullying becomes more specific with multiple categories being proposed, including flaming (or roasting), harassment, denigration, defamation, outing, jokes, online sexual harassment, and cyberstalking. With regard to measurements, many scales have been proposed and frequently refined to capture specific cyberbullying experience of the youth. This study emphasizes the value and importance of providing clear cyberbullying definitions and helps scholars in youth cyberbullying choose appropriate measurement scales.

Indexed as

BullyingCrime VictimsCyberbullyingAdolescentChildHumansASReviewchildren and adolescentscyberbullying definitioncyberbullying measurementsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID36388377
PMCPMC9642089

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.