Individual level cognitive behavioural intervention vs no intervention: Self‐reported victimisation. Post intervention.
It is very uncertain whether individual level cognitive behavioural intervention changes self‐reported victimisation. Post intervention. compared with no intervention (very low certainty).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Individual level cognitive behavioural intervention vs no intervention Self‐reported victimisation. Post intervention. · Adult workers with a learning disability It is very uncertain whether individual level cognitive behavioural intervention changes self‐reported victimisation. Post intervention. compared with no intervention (very low certainty). Interventions for prevention of bullying in the workplace (2017) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 0.55 [0.24, 1.25] | 1 study · 60 participants | Very low |
Individual level cognitive behavioural intervention vs no intervention Self‐reported victimisation. Three‐month · Adult workers with a learning disability It is very uncertain whether individual level cognitive behavioural intervention changes self‐reported victimisation. Three‐month compared with no intervention (very low certainty). Interventions for prevention of bullying in the workplace (2017) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 0.49 [0.21, 1.15] | 1 study · 60 participants | Very low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Interventions for prevention of bullying in the workplace 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.