Violence among students at school is an ever-growing problem. Bullying can be defined as all forms of repeated physical or mental violence performed by an individual on another person who is not capable of defending him/herself (Roland & Idsoe, 2001). The three studies conducted here reveal some of the characteristics and implications of this type of aggression. Whether the attacker(s) or the attacked, all protagonists in a bullying episode suffer the consequences of this behavior. Study 1 showed that students who were both victims and bullies had the lowest self-concepts in all areas studied. Victims exhibited inferior self-concepts to bullies, who in turn obtained lower scores than students not involved in bullying at all. Study 2 showed, as expected, that the group of bully/victims reported more psychosomatic problems than all other groups. In addition, there was a positive link between behavioral problems and the onset of psychosomatic disorders. Study 3, which was mainly exploratory, looked at the traumatic impact of bullying and the emergence of addictive behavior. Children who had vivid memories of being the victim of an aggressive act manifested a high level of post-traumatic stress, although no link was observed between post-traumatic stress and the type of aggression (physical, verbal, or relational). A dependency relationship was found between post-traumatic stress and substance use. The results of these studies suggest that the many complexities of the different protagonists of bullying should be taken into account in view of developing servicing that is geared to each individual.Within the past few decades, aggressive behavior among students has been an important issue for both researchers and policy makers. The findings of studies on this subject appear to

Background Evaluation of complex interventions (CI) is challenging for health researchers and requires innovative approaches. The objective of this work is to present the main methods used to evaluate CI. Methods A systematic review of the scientific literature was conducted to identify methods used for the evaluation of CI. We searched MEDLINE via PubMed databases for articles including an evaluation or a pilot study of a complex intervention, published in a ten-year period. Key-words of this research were (“complex intervention*” AND “evaluation”). Results Among 445 identified articles, 100 research results or protocols were included. Among them, 5 presented 2 different types of design in the same publication, thus our work included 105 designs. Individual randomized controlled trials (IRCT) represented 21.9% ( n = 23) of evaluation designs, randomized clinical trials adaptations 44.8% ( n = 47), quasi -experimental designs and cohort study 19.0% ( n = 20), realist evaluation 6.7% ( n = 7) and other cases studies and other approaches 8.6% ( n = 9). A process/mechanisms analysis was included in 80% ( n = 84) of these designs. Conclusion A range of methods can be used successively or combined at various steps of the evaluation approach. A framework is proposed to situate each of the designs with respect to evaluation questions. The growing interest of researchers in alternative methods and the development of their use must be accompanied by conceptual and methodological research in order to more clearly define their principles of use.

No abstract

No abstract

Various forms of therapy and treatment focus on PTSD, but chronic pain symptoms must also be assessed.