The aim of the current systematic review and meta-analysis was to examine the prevalence and incidence of somatoform symptoms and disorders (also referred to as medically unexplained symptoms, psychosomatic symptoms, functional syndromes, somatization disorder, or somatic symptom disorder) in childhood and adolescence. The PRISMA guidelines were followed, and the review was registered prior to initiation (PROSPERO CRD42022339735). Fitting search terms were entered in Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed in June, 2022. Included were articles, reports, book chapters, and conference papers that reported on the prevalence or incidence rates of somatoform symptoms and disorder in under-18-year-olds with empirical primary data; these needed to be published in English or German. Publications were excluded if they focused on abuse, trauma, serious illness, or hypochondria, as well as if they had a qualitative or experimental (intervention) study design. To be included in the meta-analysis, studies needed to report values suitable to calculate a pooled prevalence or incidence rate. After the full-text screening, 33 articles remained, of which 29 were used for the meta-analysis. The quality evaluation criteria proposed by Loney and colleagues (1998) were utilized for quality assessment. The pooled global prevalence rate was 31.0% for somatoform symptoms and 3.3% for somatoform disorders, yet heterogeneity remained high. The noteworthy prevalence rates have important implications for healthcare professionals, as well as school nurses and counselors.

Emotion dysregulation is a transdiagnostic factor in the development of various mental and behavioral disorders, thus requiring ample evidence for prevention and intervention approaches. The aim of the current systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the association between parenting dimensions/styles and emotion dysregulation in childhood and adolescence. Following the PRISMA guidelines, the review was registered (PROSPERO CRD42021251672) and search terms were entered in Web of Science, Scopus, PsycINFO, and PubMed in May 2021. Articles needed to report on empirical studies that examined the association between parenting dimensions/styles and emotion dysregulation in children/adolescents with primary data, and be published in English in a peer-reviewed journal. Additionally, articles were excluded based on certain designs and focus on special populations. The narrative synthesis includes 30 articles, and of which 27 are included in the meta-analysis. An NHLBI tool with 14 items (e.g., validity) was utilized for assessing the quality of the included studies. General trends indicate that positive parenting (e.g., warmth, supportiveness) is negatively associated with emotion dysregulation, whilst negative parenting (e.g., psychological control, authoritarian) is positively associated. The meta-analysis reveals an overall small yet significant effect, however, the heterogeneity of the studies is moderate to high. A funnel plot demonstrated no evidence of publication bias. Limitations include the varying conceptualizations of emotion dysregulation, as well as a lacking focus on specific types of emotion. Although more research is needed, addressing factors such as culture, gender, and age, the review provides first indications of the significance of parenting dimensions/styles for emotion dysregulation.

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in rapid, unprecedented changes in the lives of children and adolescents worldwide. During the first year in the COVID-19 pandemic German schools were partially closed. The restrictions to limit the pandemic can be viewed as incongruent with developmental tasks of children and adolescent, and this can harbor risks such as loss of education, well-being, and daily structure. Additionally, social skills could decrease. The current study analyzed behavioral changes in traditional bullying and cyberbullying, externalizing behavior problems and prosocial behavior from spring 2020 (pandemic outbreak) to spring 2021 (during the pandemic; a time when schools were closed and infection rates peaked). We addressed our research question with an online survey in a German sample. A total of 130 students (65 females and 65 males) with ages ranging from 10 to 17 (MT1 = 13.88; SDT1 = 1.26) participated. Our results revealed significant differences in cyberbullying and prosocial behavior and no significant differences in traditional bullying and externalizing behavior problems across one year. Cyberbullying increased and prosocial behavior decreased during the first year of pandemic.

Bullying in school and cyberbullying are highly relevant issues. Students with special educational needs in emotional–social development and learning show individual characteristics that could be risk factors for bullying perpetration and victimization (e.g., externalizing behavior problems or poor social skills). Therefore, the present study was carried out to explore differences in school bullying and cyberbullying between adolescents without and with the aforementioned special educational needs. A cross‐sectional questionnaire study was carried out with N = 649 (Mage = 13.66, SD = 2.17, 61% boys and 39% girls) participants from Lower Saxony (Germany). Analyses of covariance only revealed differences regarding school bullying. Adolescents with special educational needs in emotional–social development were significantly more often bullying perpetrators. For the victim role, there are no differences between the groups without and with special educational needs in emotional–social development and in learning. The externalizing behavior problems of adolescents were considered to be the main predictor of bullying behavior and victim experiences. To imply targeted bullying interventions and preventions further research is needed focusing on characteristics, risk, and protective factors of special educational needs in emotional–social development.

Bullying is a major social problem that is receiving increased attention in society and research. The overarching goal of the current study was to identify risk and protective factors of bullying examining direct effects between peer relationship, emotion regulation, and bullying involvement. Therefore, a cross-sectional study was conducted with N = 201 students (55.7% female) between the ages of 10 and 15 ( M = 12.86 ; SD = 1.29 ). Path model analysis revealed that trust had a negative effect on victimization, dysfunctional emotion regulation had a positive effect on perpetration and victimization, alienation had a positive effect on dysfunctional emotion regulation, and victimization and communication had a positive effect on functional emotion regulation. Additionally, dysfunctional emotion regulation strategies mediate the path from alienation to bullying and to victimization. Study results underline the importance of considering the bullying dynamic from a combined perspective of intra- and interindividual factors. The results partially confirmed the hypotheses and contribute to our knowledge about individual and contextual correlates of bullying in adolescents. The present findings suggest that group facilitation with the entire class in team building could be a useful intervention to strengthen peer relationships as well as the relationships between classmates and teachers and students.