ReviewBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Longitudinal Evidence on Peer Victimisation and Persistent Mental Health Outcomes in Youth: A Systematic Review.
Review in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Transitions in Depressive Symptom Profiles Among Adolescents with Persistent Bullying Victimization: A Latent Transition Analysis.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Usability and Feasibility of a School-Based Digital Framework for Bullying Prevention.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Pathways From Cyber Victimization to Adolescent Depression: A Latent Profile and Bridge Network Analysis.Depression and anxiety · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Longitudinal studies consistently demonstrate that repeated exposure to peer victimisation can have enduring consequences for children and adolescents' mental health. Documented outcomes include elevated risks of disorders such as depression, anxiety disorders, post-traumatic stress symptoms, and self-harm or suicidality, as well as broader psychosocial difficulties such as low self-esteem, loneliness, and internalising difficulties. However, prevalence estimates and effect sizes vary widely, reflecting differences in study design, measurement strategies, follow-up length, and the operationalisation of victimisation. This systematic review synthesises findings from 24 longitudinal studies to provide a comprehensive account of the mental health and psychosocial outcomes associated with peer victimisation. Evidence was strongest for depression and anxiety disorders, where multiple population-based cohorts in the United States, United Kingdom, Ireland, and Scandinavia showed robust prospective and retrospective associations, with risks amplified by repeated or persistent exposure. Peer victimisation also functioned as a traumatic stressor, predicting later post-traumatic stress symptoms, while self-harm and suicidality were elevated in several large-scale studies, though findings were less consistent. Additional work linked victimisation to later impaired well-being, including low self-esteem and internalizing difficulties. Mediators such as rumination, hostile attributions, and internalised stigma and moderators including gender, school belonging, and family support further explained heterogeneity in outcomes. By integrating findings across diverse contexts, this review clarifies the breadth and severity of long-term consequences of peer victimisation, highlighting both psychological mechanisms and contextual buffers. These insights can inform theoretical models of victimisation as a developmental risk factor and support the design of targeted prevention and intervention strategies.
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.