{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03384508025122122, 'fraction_numerical': 0.025819958129797628, 'mean_word_length': 5.621247113163972, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Are there any safety guidelines proven to be effective for reducing cyberbullying or predatory internet behavior?

Evidence Summary Cyberbullying is defined by the Cyberbullying Research Center as “willful and repeated harm inflicted through the use of computers, cell phones, and other electronic devices.” This formal definition was coined in 2015, though cyberbullying certainly preceded this definition. A 2012 systematic review of 35 peer-reviewed journal articles surveying more than 15,000 students reported cyber harassment and victimization rates that ranged from 5.5% to 72%, with an average of 24.4%. Because of the limited amount of published cyberbullying research, much of the data on face-to-face bullying has been extrapolated and applied to cyberbullying. Systematic reviews of prevention strategies for bullying are available, which are discussed here; however, any systematic reviews evaluating cyberbullying-specific initiatives are not present yet. A meta-analysis from 2015 analyzed 13 selected studies, comprising two longitudinal cohorts, six randomized controlled trials (one a posttest only), and five controlled trials, of school-based bullying interventions with the measurable outcome of victimization. This meta-analysis evaluated 19,619 students across 126 schools and concluded that school-based bullying programs that provided a comprehensive approach were most effective in reducing bullying. Key components of a comprehensive approach included peer counseling and establishment of a school policy on bullying, which yielded small-to-moderate reductions in victimization. A training component on emotional control showed a moderate-to-large effect (ES5 –0.462 for victimization; 95% CI, –0.577 to –0.0.347; P,.01). Similar to face-to-face bullying programs, education on cyberbullying prevention takes place in three main locations: at home among family members, at school between teachers and students, and in communities through police enforcement of established laws. Of these areas, scientific support for school-based violence and cyberbullying prevention programs is present. Cyberbullying peaks in grades six through eight, suggesting that the introduction of cyberbullying curricula and interventions inmiddle school may be optimal. The above face-to-face bullyingmeta-analysis would support this because a subgroup analysis found that antibullying programs were more effective when introduced to secondary school students rather thanwhen implemented during primary school (secondary school ES –0.315 for victimization; 95% CI, –0.396 to –0.234; P,.05). In 2018, Cyberbullying.org released a summary statement, which emphasized that education in the school system was necessary at a minimum; however, not a singular recommended program or set of guidelines that was recommended over another per their assessment was present.