CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 432Bullying, Victimization, and AggressionChild Abuse and TraumaWorkplace Violence and Bullying

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 49 of the 49 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Bullied Children and Psychosomatic Problems: A Meta-analysis

Gini, Gianluca, Pozzoli, Tiziana·2013·Pediatrics
DOI 10.1542/peds.2013-0614
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

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 countr…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1542/peds.2013-0614

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 432

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Gini, G., & Pozzoli, T.
Affiliations
University of Padua (IT)
ORCID
Venue
Pediatrics
Publisher
American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)
Published
2013-10-01
Volume
132
Issue
4
Pages
720-729
ISSN
  • 0031-4005 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-4275
DOI
10.1542/peds.2013-0614
OpenAlex
W2163294787
Cited by
432
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 30 · 2022: 58 · 2021: 46 · 2020: 35 · 2019: 44 · 2018: 44 · 2017: 38 · 2016: 33 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 1
FWCI
3.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • PEDIATRICS (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Padua Research Archive (University of Padova) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Bullying, Victimization, and Aggression
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child Abuse and Trauma
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Workplace Violence and Bullying
Keywords
school bullying, peer victimization, psychosomatic symptoms, children, adolescents, gender differences, public health problem
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Child, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Psychophysiologic Disorders, Multicenter Studies as Topic, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Crime Victims, Bullying

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review