CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 607Bullying, Victimization, and AggressionSuicide and Self-Harm StudiesImpact of Technology on Adolescents

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 64 of the 64 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Self-Harm, Suicidal Behaviours, and Cyberbullying in Children and Young People: Systematic Review

Open access
John, Ann, Glendenning, Alexander Charles, Marchant, Amanda, Montgomery, Paul, Stewart, Anne, Wood, Sophie, Lloyd, Keith, Hawton, Keith·2018·Journal of Medical Internet Research
DOI 10.2196/jmir.9044PMC PMC5934539

Published version of a preprint

Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Given the concerns about bullying via electronic communication in children and young people and its possible contribution to self-harm, we have reviewed the evidence for associations between cyberbullying involvement and self-harm or suicidal behaviors (such as suicidal ideation, suicide plans, and suicide attempts) in children and young people. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to systematically review the current evidence examining the association between cyberbullying involvement as victim or perpetrator and self-harm and suicidal behaviors in children and young people (younger than 25 years), and where possible, to meta-analyze data on the associations. METHODS: An electronic literature search was conducted for all studies published between January 1, 1996, and February 3, 2017, across sources, including MEDLINE, Cochrane, and PsycINFO. Articles were included if the study examined any association between cyberbullying involvement and self-harm or suicidal behaviors and reported empirical data in a sample aged under 25 years. Quality of included papers was assessed and data were extracted. Meta-analyses of data were conducted. RESULTS: A total of 33 eligible articles from 26 independent studies were included, covering a population of 156,384 children and young people. A total of 25 articles (20 independent studies, n=115,056) identified associations (negative influences) between cybervictimization and self-harm or suicidal behaviors or between perpetrating cyberbullying and suicidal behaviors. Three additional studies, in which the cyberbullying, self-harm, or suicidal behaviors measures had been combined with other measures (such as traditional bullying and mental health problems), also showed negative influences (n=44,526). A total of 5 studies showed no significant associations (n=5646). Meta-analyses, producing odds ratios (ORs) as a summary measure of effect size (eg, ratio of the odds of cyber victims who have experienced SH vs nonvictims who have experienced SH), showed that, compared with nonvictims, those who have experienced cybervictimization were OR 2.35 (95% CI 1.65-3.34) times as likely to self-harm, OR 2.10 (95% CI 1.73-2.55) times as likely to exhibit suicidal behaviors, OR 2.57 (95% CI 1.69-3.90) times more likely to attempt suicide, and OR 2.15 (95% CI 1.70-2.71) times more likely to have suicidal thoughts. Cyberbullying perpetrators were OR 1.21 (95% CI 1.02-1.44) times more likely to exhibit suicidal behaviors and OR 1.23 (95% CI 1.10-1.37) times more likely to experience suicidal ideation than nonperpetrators. CONCLUSIONS: Victims of cyberbullying are at a greater risk than nonvictims of both self-harm and suicidal behaviors. To a lesser extent, perpetrators of cyberbullying are at risk of suicidal behaviors and suicidal ideation when compared with nonperpetrators. Policy makers and schools should prioritize the inclusion of cyberbullying involvement in programs to prevent traditional bullying. Type of cyberbullying involvement, frequency, and gender should be assessed in future studies.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2196/jmir.9044

Cites

64 of 64 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) flowchart displaying the different stages of the screening process.
Figure 1 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) flowchart displaying the different stages of the screening process.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2 Forest plot of cybervictimization meta-analyses. OR: odds ratio.
Figure 2 Forest plot of cybervictimization meta-analyses. OR: odds ratio.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 3 Forest plot of cyberbullying perpetration meta-analyses. OR: odds ratio.
Figure 3 Forest plot of cyberbullying perpetration meta-analyses. OR: odds ratio.CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 64 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Price, M, 2010, Youth Stud Aust, 29, 51
  2. Kindrick, K, 2013, J Ark Med Soc, 110, 90

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 501–600 of 607

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
John, A., Glendenning, A. C., Marchant, A., Montgomery, P., Stewart, A., Wood, S., Lloyd, K., & Hawton, K.
Affiliations
  • Swansea University (GB)
  • University of Birmingham (GB)
  • Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
  • University of Oxford (GB)
Corresponding author
John, Ann
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Medical Internet Research
Publisher
JMIR Publications Inc.
Published
2018-04-19
Volume
20
Issue
4
Pages
e129
ISSN
1438-8871 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.2196/jmir.9044
PMC
PMC5934539
OpenAlex
W2802043748
Cited by
580
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 66 · 2025: 68 · 2024: 97 · 2023: 85 · 2022: 73 · 2021: 85 · 2020: 70 · 2019: 31 · 2018: 5
FWCI
7.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Journal of Medical Internet Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) (submittedVersion)
  • University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Health and Care Research Wales (SCS-14-11)
  • Public Health Wales
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research
  • Economic and Social Research Council (ES/N012267/2)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Bullying, Victimization, and Aggression
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
Keywords
cyberbullying, self-harm, suicidal behavior, suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, cyber victimization, cyberbullying perpetration, children and young people, adolescents, bullying, mental health
MeSH terms
Cyberbullying, Adolescent, Adult, Child, Female, Humans, Male, Self-Injurious Behavior, Young Adult, Suicidal Ideation

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