Past reviews of cyberbullying preventative interventions have critiqued the field regarding scientific rigor, and a meta-analysis found that randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of such interventions were more effective than non-RCTs. However, no review has examined the risk of bias, dosage, modality, and delivery context of such programs to date. The current study addresses this gap through a systematic review of the literature. Potential articles (N = 4,737) from 4 databases were identified and screened (Academic Search Premier including ERIC, PsychINFO, and the Psychology and Behavioral Collection; PubMed; Web of Science; Compendex); 72 articles were reviewed for eligibility. Final articles included (N = 30) were based on a rigorous search process guided by inclusion and exclusion criteria. The majority of studies were conducted in Europe; two were conducted in the USA, three in Australia, and two in the Middle East. Efforts to reduce risk of bias were evaluated using the Cochrane's Risk of Bias tool. Harvest plots were constructed to qualitatively illustrate the rigor, dosage, modality, and context of the interventions, and meta-analytic random effects models were conducted to examine effect sizes of the interventions on cyberbullying perpetration and victimization. Results suggest that cyberbullying interventions delivered through schools are effective, though expanded follow-up time is suggested, and additional evidence is needed for home settings and digital delivery.