Evidence Hub

Cyberbullying, mental health, and substance use experimentation among early adolescents: a prospective cohort study

Jason M. Nagata, Joan E. Shim, Priyadharshini Balasubramanian, Alicia W. Leong, Z. Smith-Russack, I. Y. Shao, Abubakr A. A. Al-shoaibi, Christiane K. Helmer et al.

The Lancet Regional Health - Americas, 2025

9,799 participants · 26 citations

Abstract

Summary Background Although cyberbullying has been linked with adverse health outcomes, most prior studies have been cross-sectional, and there are limited large-scale, prospective analyses examining cyberbullying and mental health and substance use outcomes in early adolescents. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine prospective associations between cyberbullying, mental health, and substance use experimentation one year later in a US national cohort of early adolescents (11–12 years old). Methods We analyzed prospective cohort data from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study (Year 2, N = 9799). Linear and logistic regression analyses were used to determine associations between cyberbullying victimization (exposure variable, Year 2) and mental health (depressive, anxiety, attention, somatic, oppositional defiant, conduct problems, and suicidal behaviours), and substance (alcohol, nicotine, cannabis) use experimentation outcomes (Year 3), adjusting for sociodemographic variables and mental health outcomes, suicidal behaviours, or reported substance use experimentation at Year 2. Findings The total analysed sample comprised 9799 who were 48.4% female and racially/ethnically diverse (45.1% non-White). 8.7% reported lifetime cyberbullying victimization. Cyberbullying victimization was prospectively associated with higher depressive (β = 0.61, 95% CI 0.02–1.19), somatic (β = 1.00, 95% CI 0.42–1.57), and attention problems (β = 0.52, 95% CI 0.03–1.00),…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cross-sectional, done in people. Its evidence level is 4 of 5 (Low · observational). Observational designs can show an association but not prove cause. Reported size: 9,799 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free