ArticleInternational archives of occupational and environmental health2023
Study of the variation of the 12-month prevalence of exposure to workplace bullying across national French working population subgroups.
Article in International archives of occupational and environmental health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Body mass index and workplace bullying: exploring causality in two general population Norwegian surveys, the HUNT study and the Norwegian Mother, Father and Child Cohort Study (MoBa).BMJ public health · 2026Article
- The Lived Experiences of Students with Bullying in King Khalid University: A Qualitative Approach Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
- Bullying, harassment, and discrimination of musculoskeletal researchers and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic: an international study.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe studies are lacking on the variation of the prevalence of exposure to workplace bullying according to subgroups of national working populations. The objectives were to assess the 12-month prevalence of bullying in the national French working population, to describe the reported reasons for bullying, and to study its variation according to various employment variables.
methodsThe study was based on the data of the 2013 national French working conditions survey. The study sample included 25,769 employees aged 15-65 working in the same job within the last 12 months. The 12-month prevalence of bullying was assessed using a 9-item questionnaire. Employment variables included: occupation, economic activity of the company, public/private sector, company size, permanent/temporary work contract, and full/part-time work. The analyses were performed using statistical methods for weighted survey data.
resultsThe 12-month prevalence of bullying was 26.7% and 28.7% for men and women, respectively. The most prevalent forms of bullying were criticisms, exclusion, and deprivation of right of expression. The leading reasons for being bullied were related to occupation, age, and gender. The prevalence of bullying was higher among the younger employees, the employees working in medium/large companies (including the public sector), and among employees working full time. Though significant, the variations according to occupations and economic activities of the company were small.
conclusionWorkplace bullying appeared as a widespread phenomenon in France. More attention should be given to young employees and the employees working in medium/large companies. Preventive measures should also target the whole working population comprehensively.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.