ArticleBMJ open2023
Reducing the incidence and impact of peer-to-peer online trolling: a protocol for a scoping review.
Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionGovernments worldwide are committed to reducing the prevalence of peer-to-peer online trolling. The practice of peer-to-peer online trolling, which is broadly defined as where a user intends to cause disruption or conflict online for their own amusement or advantage, is a widespread pervasive and damaging behavior, affecting over one-third of all social media users. There remains, however, a substantial barrier to addressing this behaviour due to a lack of understanding of peer-to-peer online trolling and its unique psychopathology that distinguishes it from other forms of peer-to-peer online abuse such as cyberbullying and flaming, as well as the primary information technology approach used to investigate trolling. Providing a synthesis of peer-to-peer online trolling research will assist organisations, governments and educators in addressing this deviant behaviour online. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This protocol follows the six-stage scoping review process proposed by Arksey and O'Malley. Identifying the scoping review research question (stage 1) is followed by discussion on how studies will be selected (stage 2). We then discuss how we will determine which studies will be included in the scoping review (stage 3), as well as chart the data involved for each study included (stage 4). In stage 5, the scoping review protocol gathers, synthesises and reports the results, and consults with stakeholders about the initial protocol specifications (stage 6). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: As the scoping review methodology focuses on incorporating information from available publications, ethical approval is not required. An article summarising the scoping review results will be submitted for publication to a journal, presented at appropriate conferences and disseminated as part of future workshops with professionals and educators involved in reducing online trolling.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.