Health Evidence hosted a ~40 minute webinar on school-based anti-bullying programs. This work received support from KT Canada funding from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR). Key messages and implications for practice were presented on Thursday November 28, 2013 at 1:00 pm EST. This webinar focused on interpreting the evidence in the following review: Farrington, D.P., & Tfoti, M.M. (2009). School-based programs to reduce bullying and victimization. The Campbell Collaboration, 2009(6), DOI 10.4073/csr.2009.6. Robyn Traynor, Research Coordinator with Health Evidence, lead the webinar.

1. This work received support from KT Canada funding from the Canadian Institutes of Health
Research (CIHR)
Welcome!
School-based programs to reduce
bullying and victimization:
Evidence and implications for
public health
You will be placed on hold until the webinar begins.
The webinar will begin shortly, please remain on the line.

2. Funding & Partners

3. Participant Side Panel
in WebEx
Housekeeping
Use Q&A to post comments/questions
during the webinar
•‘Send’ questions to All (not privately to
‘Host’)
Connection issues
•Recommend using a wired Internet
connection (vs. wireless), to help
prevent connection challenges
WebEx 24/7 help line: 1-866-229-3239
Q&A

4. The Health Evidence Team
Kara DeCorby
Managing Director
Heather Husson
Project Manager
Robyn Traynor
Research Coordinator
Lori Greco
Knowledge Broker
Stephanie Workentine
Research Assistant
Maureen Dobbins
Scientific Director
Matt Edmonds
Research Assistant
Tel: 905 525-9140 ext 22481
E-mail: dobbinsm@mcmaster.ca
Yaso Gowrinathan
Research Assistant/
Coordinator
Kelly Graham
Research Assistant

5. What is www.healthevidence.org?
Evidence
inform
Decision Making

6. Why use www.healthevidence.org?
1. Saves you time
2. Relevant & current evidence
3. Transparent process
4. Supports for EIDM available
5. Easy to use

7. A Model for Evidence-Informed
Decision Making
Source: National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools. (revised 2012). A Model for Evidence-Informed DecisionMaking in Public Health. [fact sheet]. Retrieved from http://www.nccmt.ca/pubs/FactSheet_EIDM_EN_WEB.pdf

8. Evidence-Informed Decision Making
1. Cultivate a culture of inquiry, critical thinking
and evidence-based practice “culture”
2. Ask a clear, focused, searchable question
3. Search for the best available evidence
4. Critically appraise the relevant evidence

9. Evidence-Informed Decision Making
5. Synthesize and integrate the evidence with expertise,
local context, and client preference
6. Implement and evaluate the outcome(s) of the
change in practice or policy
7. Engage in knowledge exchange

10. Review
Farrington, D.P., & Tfoti, M.M. (2009). School-based
programs to reduce bullying and victimization (Report).
The Campbell Collaboration, 2009(6), DOI
10.4073/csr.2009.6.

11. Importance of this Review
• Bullying can have long-term effects on children’s
self-esteem and confidence, and elevate lifelong risk
for mental disorder, poor academic and vocational
achievement, and criminality.
• As many as 25% of students in grades 6-10 say they
have been the victim of bullying once or twice in the
past month, and up to 12% say it happens to them
at least once per week

12. Poll Question #1
Who has heard of a PICO(S)
question before?
1.Yes
2.No

13. Searchable Questions
1. Population (situation)
2. Intervention (exposure)
3. Comparison (other group)
4. Outcomes
5. Setting
Think “PICOS”

14. Evidence Summary:
Traynor (2013)
Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of programs
designed to reduce school bullying perpetration and
victimization (i.e. being bullied).
P Students (kindergarten to high school)
I School-based anti-bullying programs
C No intervention (i.e. usual care)
O Prevention or reduction of school bullying
(perpetration and victimization)

15. Overall Considerations
• Quality Rating: 8 (strong) Methodologically strong
review based on 41 program evaluations of
moderate methodological quality.
• School-based anti-bullying programs reduced the
rates of both perpetration (i.e. act of bullying) and
victimization (i.e. being bullied).

16. School-Based Anti-Bullying
Program Elements
Associated with
DECREASE
Bullying
• Parent training/meetings
• Disciplinary method
• Intensity of program for
children
Victimization
• Anti-bullying videos
• Disciplinary methods
• Duration of program for
children
Associated with
INCREASE
• Working with peers
(including peer
mentoring and
mediation)

17. School-Based Anti-Bullying
Program Features
Associated with MORE EFFECTIVENESS include:
• programs that target older children and
programs with outcome measures twice per
month

18. What’s the evidence Outcomes reported in the review
1. Bullying (41 studies)
2. Victimization (41 studies)

19. What’s the evidence – Bullying
School-based anti-bullying programs reduced prevalence
of bullying (OR 1.36; 95% CI: 1.26 to 1.47; p<0.0001)
Design elements associated with a decrease in bullying:
• Age of children (i.e. >11 years) (p<0.0001)
• Outcome measurement frequency (i.e. >2 times per
month) (p<0.0002)

20. What’s the evidence – Bullying
(Program Elements)
Program elements independently related to bullying
effect sizes:
• Parents attended meetings to learn about the anti-bullying
initiative: Z=3.25, p<0.001
• Disciplinary methods: (i.e. punitive methods, Z=2.02,
p<0.043)
• Intensity for children: (i.e. >20 hours, Z=2.56, p<0.010)

21. What’s the evidence – Bullying
(Program Elements)
Other program elements associated with decreased
bullying include:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Playground supervision (p<0.0001)
Duration (>270 days) of program for children (p<0.0001)
Having training for teachers, in general (p<0.006)
Duration(>4 days, p<0.0004) and Intensity (i.e., >10 hours,
p<0.0001) of teacher training
Classroom management (p<0.005)
Classroom rules (p<0.006)
Whole-school anti-bullying policy (p<0.008)
School conferences (p<0.008)
Information for parents (e.g. written materials) (p<0.013)
Cooperative group work (i.e. experts from different
disciplines) (p<0.019)

22. What’s the evidence - Victimization
School-based anti-bullying programs reduced prevalence
of victimization (OR 1.29, 95% CI: 1.18 to 1.42, p<0.0001)
Design elements associated with a decrease in
victimization:
• Age of children (i.e. >11 years, p<0.047)
• Outcome measure (i.e. >2 times per month, p<0.0001)

23. What’s the evidence – Victimization
(Program Elements)
Program elements independently related to victimization
effect sizes:
• Use of anti-bullying videos (Z=2.55, p<0.011)
• Disciplinary methods (Z=2.35, p<0.019)
• Greater duration for children (Z=2.79, p<0.005)

24. What’s the evidence – Victimization
(Program Elements)
Other program elements associated with a decrease in
victimization include:
• parent training/meetings (p<0.0001)
• cooperative group work (p<0.001)
• greater intensity for teachers (p<0.028) and children
(p<0.002)
• greater duration for teachers (p<0.0003)
Interventions involving work with peers (i.e.
mediation/mentoring provided by student peers) was
associated with an increase in victimization (Z=4.22,
p<0.0001)

25. General Implications
School-based anti-bullying programs are effective in
reducing school bullying and victimization, particularly
when firm disciplinary methods are incorporated.
To specifically target bullying, programs should be of
high intensity (> 20 hrs) and include training and regular
meetings for parents.
To specifically target victimization, programs should be
of longer duration and be delivered via videos.

26. General Implications
However, due to potential harms, public health programs
should not include work with peers.
Public health should also consider how the programs are
implemented.

27. It is also important to note that these results are based
on a relatively small number of studies.

28. Questions?

29. Poll Questions # 2 and 3
Survey Participation
Your Feedback is greatly appreciated!

30. Contact Us
info@healthevidence.org
For a copy of the presentation please visit:
http://www.healthevidence.org/webinars.aspx
Login with your Health Evidence username and password or
register if you aren’t a member yet.