Nick Axford

Dr. Nick Axford


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

24Years (2003-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 October 2012 in Children and Youth Services Review
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
NANick Axford
Nick Axford
MLMinna Lehtonen
Minna Lehtonen
DKDwan Kaoukji
Dwan Kaoukji
KTKate Tobin
Kate Tobin
VBVashti Berry
Vashti Berry

1 July 2020 in Prevention Science
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
NANick Axford
Nick Axford
GBGretchen Bjornstad
Gretchen Bjornstad
SCSuzy Clarkson
Suzy Clarkson
OUObioha C. Ukoumunne
Obioha C. Ukoumunne
ZWZoe Wrigley
Zoe Wrigley
JHJudy Hutchings
Judy Hutchings
The study evaluated the implementation fidelity and effectiveness of KiVa, an evidence-based program that aims to prevent and address bullying in schools, with a particular emphasis on changing the role of bystanders. The study was a two-arm waitlist control cluster randomized controlled trial in which 22 primary schools (clusters) (N = 3214 students aged 7–11) were allocated using a 1:1 ratio to intervention (KiVa; 11 clusters,n = 1588 students) and a waitlist control (usual school provision; 11 clusters,n = 1892 children)). The trial statistician (but not schools or researchers) remained blind to allocation status. The outcomes were as follows: student-reported victimization (primary outcome) and bullying perpetration; teacher-reported child behavior and emotional well-being; and school absenteeism (administrative records). Implementation fidelity was measured using teacher-completed online records (for class lessons) and independent researcher observations (for school-wide elements). Outcome analyses involved 11 intervention schools (n = 1578 children) and 10 control schools (n = 1636 children). There was no statistically significant effect on the primary outcome of child-reported victimization (adjusted intervention/control OR 0.76; 95% CI 0.55 to 1.06;p = 0.11) or on the secondary outcomes. The impact on victimization was not moderated by child gender, age, or victimization status at baseline. Lesson adherence was good but exposure (lesson length) was lower than the recommended amount, and there was considerable variability in the implementation of whole school elements. The trial found insufficient evidence to conclude that KiVa had an effect on the primary outcome. A larger trial of KiVa in the UK is warranted, however, with attention to issues regarding implementation fidelity. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN23999021 Date 10-6-13

9 July 2009 in Child & Family Social Work
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
NANick Axford
Nick Axford

28 October 2015 in School Mental Health
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
VBVashti Berry
Vashti Berry
NANick Axford
Nick Axford
SBSarah Blower
Sarah Blower
RTRod S. Taylor
Rod S. Taylor
RERhiannon Tudor Edwards
Rhiannon Tudor Edwards
TBTracey Bywater
Tracey Bywater

1 February 2013 in Children and Youth Services Review
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
NANick Axford
Nick Axford
LMLouise Morpeth
Louise Morpeth

21 September 2015 in Journal of Children's Services
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
NANick Axford
Nick Axford
DFDavid P Farrington
David P Farrington
SCSuzy Clarkson
Suzy Clarkson
GBGretchen J Bjornstad
Gretchen J Bjornstad
ZWZoe Wrigley
Zoe Wrigley
JHJudy Hutchings
Judy Hutchings
Purpose: – The purpose of this paper is to describe how and why school-based programmes to prevent or reduce bullying involve parents, and what impact involving parents has on bullying.Design/methodology/approach: – A review of relevant literature, in particular systematic reviews and meta-analyses.Findings: – The logic of involving parents in school-based bullying prevention programmes is that this increases the likelihood of parents first, telling schools that their child is being bullied, which in turn enables the school to act appropriately, and second, being able to address bullying-related issues effectively at home. Parent involvement is associated with a reduction in bullying but further research is needed to determine if it is a causal factor. Programmes tend not to include a parenting education and support element, despite negative parenting behaviour being associated with children being a victim or a bully/victim.Practical implications: – There is good reason to involve parents in school-based bullying prevention. Given the parenting risk factors for bullying perpetration and victimisation, bullying prevention programmes could also usefully offer parenting education and support.Originality/value: – The paper focuses exclusively on the role of parents in school-based bullying prevention programmes. It articulates the logic of involving parents and summarises the impact of parent involvement.