Recruiting soon

PRAISE Program for Reducing Peer Aggression and Bullying in Elementary Students

0 criteria met from your profileSee at a glance how your profile meets each eligibility criteria.
What is being tested

Universal, classroom-based, Bullying and Aggression Prevention Program

Behavioral
Who is being recruted

Aggression Childhood

+ Bullying Victimization
+ Social Behavior
Over 8 Years
+10 Eligibility Criteria

See all eligibility criteria

How is the trial designed

Prevention Study

Interventional
Study Start: October 2025

See protocol details

Summary

Principal SponsorChildren's Hospital of Philadelphia
Study ContactTracy E Waasdorp, PhD MSed
Last updated: September 25, 2025
Sourced from a government-validated database.Claim as a partner
Study start date: October 1, 2025Actual date on which the first participant was enrolled.

The study is designed to test a program called PRAISE, which aims to prevent bullying and aggression among children in 3rd to 5th grade. This program teaches kids how to recognize emotions, calm down, understand others' actions, and make thoughtful choices during conflicts. It also includes lessons that encourage empathy, understanding different perspectives, and empowering students to act positively when they see bullying. The goal is to see if PRAISE can effectively reduce bullying and aggression, while also helping children improve their problem-solving skills and confidence in handling conflicts peacefully. In this study, elementary schools will be randomly selected to either use the PRAISE program or not, creating a comparison between the two groups. The program involves coaching and curriculum activities that are part of the regular school schedule. Researchers will track changes in students' behaviors and skills, focusing on how well the program helps students become more peaceful and proactive bystanders. The study also looks at factors like how the program is taught and individual differences among students and facilitators to see how these might affect the program's success. There are no specific risks mentioned, as the study involves regular school-based activities rather than medical interventions.

Official TitleExamining the Efficacy of the PRAISE With Coaching Program in Reducing Peer Aggression and Bullying 
Principal SponsorChildren's Hospital of Philadelphia
Study ContactTracy E Waasdorp, PhD MSed
Last updated: September 25, 2025
Sourced from a government-validated database.Claim as a partner

Protocol

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.
Design Details
1008 patients to be enrolledTotal number of participants that the clinical trial aims to recruit.
Prevention Study
Prevention studies aim to stop a disease from developing. They often involve people at risk and test things like vaccines, lifestyle changes, or preventive medications.

How participants are assigned to different groups/arms
In this clinical study, participants are placed into groups randomly, like flipping a coin. This ensures that the study is fair and unbiased, making the results more reliable. By assigning participants by chance, researchers can better compare treatments without external influences.

Other Ways to Assign Participants
Non-randomized allocation: Participants are assigned based on specific factors, such as their medical condition or a doctor's decision.
None (Single-arm trial): If the study has only one group, all participants receive the same treatment, and no allocation is needed.

How treatments are given to participants
Participants are divided into different groups, each receiving a specific treatment at the same time. This helps researchers compare how well different treatments work against each other.

Other Ways to Assign Treatments
Single-group assignment: Everyone gets the same treatment.
Cross-over assignment: Participants switch between treatments during the study.
Factorial assignment: Participants receive different combinations of treatments.
Sequential assignment: Participants receive treatments one after another in a specific order, possibly based on individual responses.
Other assignment: Treatment assignment does not follow a standard or predefined design.

How the effectiveness of the treatment is controlled
In a non placebo-controlled study, no participants receive an inert substance (placebo) to compare outcomes. Instead, all participants receive either the experimental treatment or an alternative treatment (often the Standard of Care). This method allows researchers to compare the effects of the experimental treatment with those of a different active intervention, rather than a placebo.

Other Options
Placebo-Controlled: A placebo is used to compare the effects of the experimental treatment with those of an inert substance, isolating the true treatment effect.

How the interventions assigned to participants is kept confidential
Everyone involved in the study knows which treatment is being given. This is typically used when it's not possible or necessary to hide the treatment details from participants or researchers.

Other Ways to Mask Information
Single-blind: Participants do not know which treatment they are receiving, but researchers do.
Double-blind: Neither participants nor researchers know which treatment is given.
Triple-blind: Participants, researchers, and outcome assessors do not know which treatment is given.
Quadruple-blind: Participants, researchers, outcome assessors, and care providers all do not know which treatment is given.

Eligibility

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria: person's general health condition or prior treatments.
Conditions
Criteria
Any sexBiological sex of participants that are eligible to enroll.
Over 8 YearsRange of ages for which participants are eligible to join.
Healthy volunteers allowedIf individuals who are healthy and do not have the condition being studied can participate.
Conditions
Pathology
Aggression Childhood
Bullying Victimization
Social Behavior
Criteria
4 inclusion criteria required to participate
Employed by one of the participating school sites
Teach and/or provide services to students in 3rd-5th grade
Enrolled in one of the participating school sites
In a 3rd-5th grade classroom participating in the study
6 exclusion criteria prevent from participating
Do not speak English
Do not speak English
Special education students not integrated in a regular education classroom
Do not teach/provide services with 3rd-5th grade students at the participating school sites

Show More Criteria

Study Plan

Find out more about all the medication administered in this study, their detailed description and what they involve.
Treatment Groups
Study Objectives
2 intervention groups 

are designated in this study

This study does not include a placebo group 

Treatment Groups
Group I
No Intervention
These schools do not receive the PRAISE intervention. These schools can have their standard aggression and bullying practices such as community meeting, restorative circles, Second Step program, and the Olweus program. We will measure what classrooms in the comparison condition are doing, but we will not intervene.
Group II
Experimental
These schools will receive the PRAISE program which includes training and coaching from the research team.
Study Objectives
Primary Objectives

Measured via peer-reports. Students rate the frequency that each classmate engages in relational (1 item), verbal (1 item) and physical (1 item) aggression on a scale from 1- Not at All to 5- A Whole Lot. Each individual child gets an average score based the classroom peer reports with higher scores reflecting more of that outcome.

Student self-report of social information processing knowledge will be gathered using the Knowledge of Anger Problem Solving measure (9 items) where items are scored a 1 if correct and 0 if incorrect and summed (Range: 0-9), higher scores reflect better social information processing

Student self-report of hostile attributions will be assessed using the Cartoon-Based Hostile Attributional Bias measure, with 2 relational vignettes and 2 physical vignettes, with one question asking whether a behavior was intentional or unintentional. Each vignette has a range of 0 (no bias) to 4 (strong bias). Scores on the 2 items per vignette type (relational, physical) are summed where higher scores reflect a worse outcome.

Student self-report of their use of non-aggressive or violent responses when in a conflict with a peer will be assessed using 9 items drawn from the measure developed for the Multisite Violence Prevention Project with a range of 1-Not at to 4-Very confident. Items are averaged with higher scores reflecting more conference in their ability to not use violent or aggressive responses.

Measured via student self-report using items drawn from the Peer Conflict Scale -Youth Version measure, the proactive relational (6 items) and reactive relational (6 items) and overt (5 items). Items, with a range of 1-Not at all true to 4-Definitely true, will be averaged per scale. Higher scores indicate more proactive relational, reactive relational and reactive overt aggression.

Bullying will be assessed using the Behavior Based Bullying measure (9 items; Range: 1- Never to 4- or more times per month), items are averaged where higher scores means more bullying perpetration.

Student Self-report on items drawn from the European Cyberbullying Intervention Project Questionnaire will assess two scales: cyberbullying perpetration (7 items) and victimization (7 items) with answers ranging from 1-Never to 5-A few times a week. Items will be averaged such that higher score is more perpetration or victimization experiences.

Self-report of positive bystander behaviors will be assessed using 5 items drawn from the Maryland Safe and Supportive Schools (MDS3) Climate Survey with answers ranging from 1-Never to 5-All the time. Items are averaged with higher scores indicating more use of positive bystander behaviors.

Using teacher report on each child in their classroom, the Children's Social Behavior Questionnaire will assess a child's relational (7 items) and overt (4 items) aggression with a range of 1-Never true to 5-Almost always true. Items are averaged per scale with higher scores indicating more relational or overt aggression.
Secondary Objectives

Student self-report of cognitive empathy using the perspective taking scale of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (6 items; Range: 1-Never to 5-All the Time). Items are averaged where higher scores indicated more empathy.

Student self-report of victimization by peers using the Social Experience Questionnaire (SEQ; 10 items, Range: 1-Never to 5-All the time). Items are averaged with higher scores indicated more peer bullying-victimization experiences.

Teacher report on each child in their classroom will be used to assess academic engagement using the Academic Competence Evaluation Scale (8 items; Range: 1-Never to 5-Almost Always). Items are averaged with higher scores reflecting more engagement.

Teacher report on each child in their classroom of their perceived relationships (closeness and conflict) using the Closeness (5 items) and Conflict (5 items) drawn from the Student Teacher Relationship Scales (STRS; Range: 1-Definitely doesn't apply to 5-Definitely applies). Items per scale are averaged such that higher scores indicated more closeness or conflict between teacher and student.

Student self-report of their perception of the class academic and social climate using 6 items drawn from the Maryland Safe and Supportive Schools (MDS3) Climate Survey with a range from 1-Strongly Agree to 4-Strongly Disagree. Items are averaged such that higher scores indicate a more positive classroom climate.

Study Centers

These are the hospitals, clinics, or research facilities where the trial is being conducted. You can find the location closest to you and its status.
This study has 1 location
Suspended
Children's Hospital of PhiladelphiaPhiladelphia, United StatesSee the location
Recruiting soonOne Study Center