Objectives. Healthcare systems all over the world are increasingly alarmed by the prevalence of workplace violence (WPV) directed at healthcare workers (HCWs) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, the aim of the current review was to investigate the factors associated with WPV against HCWs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods. This study was conducted in December 2021. Four international databases along with two Iranian databases were searched. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement served as the foundation for the reporting procedure. Results. A total of 13 articles were included in the analysis. Results showed that females are less at risk of WPV (odds ratio [OR] 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.67, 0.84], p = 0.000 based on a fixed-effects model). Moreover, significant association was found between education level (OR 1.09, 95% CI [1.05, 1.14]), age (correlation = 0.025, 95% CI [0.014, 0.036]) and work experience (correlation = 0.028, 95% CI [0.016, 0.016]) and WPV. Conclusion. The primary factors linked to WPV exposure were found to be gender, education level, age and work experience. Additional research is necessary to provide more accurate and detailed data.

BACKGROUND: Limited studies have examined the extent to which cyberbullying and offline bullying are factors related to youth admissions to behavioral health inpatient units. However, considering the rising use of technology and prevalence of youth bullying, intake procedures require adaptation to account for modern-day psychological pressures facing youth. AIMS: Our aims were to pilot and analyze results from a novel intake form, assessing offline bullying and cyberbullying, in a youth inpatient behavioral health facility. METHODS: Upon admission at an inpatient behavioral health facility in the Midwestern United States, 622 youth (ages 10 and older) and their parent/guardian completed intake forms including questions about their experience of bullying, cyberbullying, and feelings of safety in different environments, and feelings about whether bullying contributed to their inpatient admission. RESULTS: Overall, 21.50% (134/622) of youth self-reported being a cybervictim, 6.10% (38/622) reported being an offline bully victim, and 8.04% (50/622) reported mixed bullying. Bullied youth felt significantly less safe in all environments than non-bullied youth, and bullied youth who felt unsafe were more likely to attribute their hospitalization to bullying. Troublingly, only about one-third of parents were aware of cyberbullying. CONCLUSION: Using traditional standards of care that do not address offline bullying/cyberbullying, mental health care workers may be missing critical factors that contribute to youth inpatient hospitalization for mental health issues. Behavioral health units should consider adapting intake forms to include offline bullying/cyberbullying questions and developing programming for parents and adults to address issues of online and offline safety.

Bullying, discrimination, and harassment (BDH) within healthcare teams is a global issue that risks healthcare worker wellbeing, patient safety, public health, and industry reputations. Collectively, fragmented regulation, weak detection and correction processes, conflicts of interest, and fear of retribution for complainants create an environment that enables perpetrators. Specialty training Colleges and other stakeholders can collaborate to address this issue more effectively. This paper examines Australian processes and proposes that the existing disparate mechanisms should be replaced with a national BDH framework that is supported by an independent investigation body. The authors seek to stimulate discussion to reform practice in Australia and in other countries with similar health systems.

Workplace violence (WPV) is a commonly reported occupational hazard in healthcare and its prevalence is increasing. WPV occurs in all types of practice settings, but little is known about WPV in primary care settings in the United States (US). Because primary care practice settings differ from the inpatient settings, further examination of WPV in primary care is warranted. Our objective was to summarize the available literature highlight important gaps. We conducted a search using Pubmed and OVID for US studies of WPV in US-based adult primary care practices. Studies including only pediatric populations were excluded. Due to the lack of available literature conducted in US primary care settings, we expanded our search to include international studies. We identified 70 studies of which 5 were US based. Due to the lack of significant numbers of US-based studies, we opted to conduct a narrative review of all available studies. The evidence shows that WPV is a common occurrence in primary care settings in many countries and that the majority of primary care clinicians have experienced at least some form of non-physical violence in their careers. Most of the studies conducted were cross-sectional in design and reported on both non-physical and physical forms of WPV. There was not a consistent trend between genders in experiencing the major forms of WPV, but women were consistently more likely to be subjected to sexual harassment. Potential root causes for WPV could generally be categorized as patient-level, clinician-level, clinical encounter specific, and operational root causes. While most WPV was found to be non-physical, it still had significant emotional and job-related impacts on clinicians. These troubling results highlight the need for further studies to be conducted in the US.

Harassment and abuse represent a pervasive and critical problem in sport with far-reaching consequences. Survivors\' testimonials underscore the profound and enduring impact of these experiences at individual, interpersonal, organizational and community level. Many of their stories reveal painful inaction from responsible adults in the sport organization, aggravating the harm. Other contributing factors to the harm inflicted include a culture of silence, lack of knowledge and understanding of what constitutes abuse, unawareness of reporting and supporting mechanisms, and fear of potential consequences. While effective bystander interventions have been developed outside the sport context, particularly targeting students in higher education, such initiatives have yet to be extensively adapted and assessed within the sport context. To address this gap, the Safe Sport Allies Erasmus+ collaborative partnership relied on the intervention mapping approach as a guiding framework to systematically develop a bystander training program (i.e., Safe Sport Allies) to train youth sport participants and youth sport coaches to act as effective bystanders. The current paper describes the comprehensive development process and provides an overview of implementation and evaluation possibilities. Throughout the paper, it is explained how each step of the Intervention Mapping approach shaped the Safe Sport Allies bystander training program. The program development, and the developed plans for implementation and evaluation are presented, shedding light on challenges encountered. The bystander training program developed in this paper and the implementation and evaluation plans can serve as an outline to build future interventions within this critical domain of safeguarding in sport.

Abuse, bullying, harassment, and discrimination are prominent workplace occurrences within cardiothoracic (CT) surgery that cause burnout and threaten the well-being of surgeons. Under-represented and marginalized groups experience higher incidences of these negative events, and CT surgery is one of the least diverse specialties. The CT surgery workforce and institutional leadership must prioritize mentorship, sponsorship, and allyship to promote a diverse and healthy specialty for surgeon recruitment, growth, and job satisfaction.

Doxxing, a type of cyberbullying, occurs when an individual\'s personal information is shared without consent and with malintent. Doxxing can be seen as a form of vigilantism, a way to hold others accountable for their actions or opinions; however, this form of justice can have catastrophic impacts on the victim, especially physicians. Since the COVID-19 pandemic, where physicians and health care providers strongly led public health advocacy efforts on social media, the frequency of doxxing and cyberbullying has increased. Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives have also recently sparked controversy in dermatology and medicine, where advocates for DEI and those opposed to DEI initiatives have also been doxxed. This behavior is incredibly taxing on an individual\'s mental health, with substantial negative implications on a person\'s social, personal, and professional life. We discuss the ethical considerations of doxxing and avenues for better protecting physicians.

In 2017, the U.S. Center for SafeSport launched the first public disciplinary sports registry listing individuals accused of engaging in harmful behavior against child and adult athletes. Our study reviews information from 1,161 individuals on SafeSport\'s sports registry. Of the individuals on the sports registry, 22% were concurrently listed on the national registry for sexual offenses. Relative to individuals listed only on the sports registry, those on both registries were 4.5 and 1.4 times more likely to have sexual misconduct allegations and allegations involving a child, respectively. Of those on both registries, 31% were on the national registry approximately seven years before appearing on the sports registry. We discuss whether and how public registries represent effective strategies for crime prevention.

OBJECTIVE: Previous literature has consistently documented harassment and discrimination in surgery. These experiences may contribute to the continuing gender inequity in surgical fields. The objective of our study was to survey Canadian surgeons and surgical trainees to gain a greater understanding of the experience of harassment across genders, career stage, and specialty.
METHODS: A cross-sectional, online survey was distributed to Canadian residents, fellows, and practicing surgeons in general surgery, plastic surgery, and neurosurgery through their national society email lists and via social media posts.
RESULTS: There were 194 included survey respondents (60 residents, 11 fellows, and 123 staff) from general surgery (44.8%), plastic surgery (42.7%), and neurosurgery (12.5%). 59.8% of women reported having experienced harassment compared to only 26.0% of men. Women were significantly more likely to be harassed by colleagues and patients/families compared to men. Residents (62.5%) were two times more likely to report being harassed compared to fellows/staff (38.3%). Residents were significantly more likely to be harassed by patients/families while fellows/staff were more likely to be harassed by colleagues. There were no significant differences in self-reported harassment across the three surgical specialties. There was no significant difference in rates of reported harassment between current residents (62.5%), and fellow/staff recollections of their experiences of harassment during residency (59.2%).
CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of gender-based discrimination remains high and harassment prevalence remains largely unchanged from when current staff were in residency. Our findings highlight a need to implement systemic changes to support the increasing number of women entering surgery, and to improve surgical culture to continue to attract the best and brightest to the field.

BACKGROUND: Gender discrimination is known to affect societies in many different settings. Medical education is no exception. This study focusses on the consequences, gender discrimination can have on medical students and their choice of (junior) residency specialty.
METHODS: An online questionnaire was developed and distributed among the 40 medical faculties in Germany. The study population contained medical students in their fifth and sixth academic year.
RESULTS: The survey\'s participants consisted of 759 students from 31 universities. Female medical students experienced significantly more gender discrimination compared to their male colleagues (f = 487, 87.9% vs. m = 76, 45.8%, p < 0.0001). The specialties with the most reported gender discrimination were family medicine (f = 180, 42.9% vs. m = 15, 23.8%, p < 0.05), followed by surgery (f = 369, 87.4% vs. m = 44, 69.8%, p < 0.05), internal medicine (f = 282, 67.3% vs. m = 37, 58.7%, ns), orthopaedics/casualty surgery (f = 270, 65.1% vs. m = 32, 50.8%, p < 0.05), and gynaecology (women (f = 142, 34.1% vs. m = 34, 54.0%, p < 0.05). Gynaecology was the only specialty, men experienced more discrimination compared to women. Among the students that ever changed their specialty of choice (f = 346 (73.3%) m = 95 (72%)), significantly more women than men claimed gender discrimination to be one of the main three reasons for their specialty choice (f = 42, 12.1% vs. m = 1, 1.1%, p < 0.05). In addition, 53 students (f = 50 (10.6%) m = 3 (2.3%)) stated to rule out a specialty from the beginning due to gender discrimination.
CONCLUSIONS: Gender discrimination is frequently experienced by medical students in Germany. It influences their choice of medical specialty directly. Our data suggest a fundamental problem that proposes and implicates certain specialties to be attractive for only one gender.