ArticleBMC public health2024
Prevalence and nature of workplace bullying and harassment and associations with mental health conditions in England: a cross-sectional probability sample survey.
Article in BMC public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Horizontal Violence or Workplace Bullying Among Intensive Care Unit Nurses: A Mixed Systematic Review.Journal of advanced nursing · 2025Pooled it
- Workplace bullying and turnover intentions among workers: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC public health · 2025Pooled it
- The overlooked trauma: psychological violence and its impact on PTSD symptoms.European journal of psychotraumatology · 2026Article
- Correction: Prevalence and nature of workplace bullying and harassment and associations with mental health conditions in England: a cross-sectional probability sample survey.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Digital harassment and its mental health impact among healthcare professionals: A scoping review.PCN reports : psychiatry and clinical neurosciences · 2026Review
- Workplace Bullying and Depression Among the Saudi Working Population: A Cross-Sectional Study.The Psychiatric quarterly · 2026Article
- 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
- Trauma, Power, and Psychological Safety: Understanding the Mental Health Impact of Workplace Bullying.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Workplace violence and fear of violence: an assessment of prevalence across industrial sectors and its mental health effects.Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health · 2025Article
- Understanding the Burden of Mental Illness Induced by Workplace Mobbing: A Scoping Review.Actas espanolas de psiquiatria · 2025Article
- Workplace bullying among medical laboratory professionals in Ghana: insights from self-reported experiences, challenges to mitigation structures, and coping strategies.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Empowering bystanders: a psychological and institutional model for intervention in academic bullying.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEvidence on workplace bullying and harassment (WBH) in the UK has not used probability-sample surveys with robust mental health assessments. This study aimed to profile the prevalence and nature of WBH in England, identify inequalities in exposure, and quantify adjusted associations with mental health.
methodsData were from the 2014 Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Survey, a cross-sectional probability-sample survey of the household population in England. Criteria for inclusion in the secondary analysis were being aged 16-70 years and in paid work in the past month (n = 3838). Common mental disorders (CMDs) were assessed using the Clinical Interview Schedule-Revised and mental wellbeing using the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale. Analyses were weighted. We examined associations between past-year WBH and current CMD using multivariable regression modelling, adjusting for sociodemographic factors. Interaction terms tested for gender differences in associations. The study received ethical approval (ETH21220-299).
resultsOne in ten employees (10.6%, n = 444/3838) reported past-year experience of WBH, with rates higher in women (12.2%, n = 284/2189), those of mixed, multiple, and other ethnicity (21.0%, n = 15/92), and people in debt (15.2%, n = 50/281) or living in cold homes (14.6%, n = 42/234). Most commonly identified perpetrators of WBH were line managers (53.6%, n = 244/444) or colleagues (42.8%, n = 194/444). Excessive criticism (49.3%, n = 212/444), verbal abuse (42.6%, n = 187/444), and humiliation (31.4%, n = 142/444) were the most common types. WBH was associated with all indicators of poor mental health, including CMD (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.65, 95% CI 2.02-3.49), and 11 of 14 mental wellbeing indicators, including lower levels of confidence (aOR 0.57, 0.46-0.72) and closeness to others (aOR 0.57, 0.46-0.72). Patterns of association between WBH and mental health were similar in men and women.
conclusionsThese findings reinforce a need for more cohesive UK legislation against WBH; guidance on recognition of bullying behaviours for employees, managers, and human resources, focusing on prevention and early intervention, and increased awareness of the impact of WBH on mental health among health service practitioners. Limitations include reliance on cross-sectional data collected before pandemic-related and other changes in workplace practices. Longitudinal data are needed to improve evidence on causality and the longevity of mental health impacts.
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.