SynthesisFrontiers in psychology2025
Bystander interventions against gender-based violence and harassment in the workplace: a scoping review.
Synthesis in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Bystander interventions against gender-based violence and harassment in the workplace: a scoping review.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Pooled it
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Gender-based violence and harassment (GBVH) has detrimental effects on organisational performance and employee well-being. Primary-level bystander intervention programmes that enable employees to act when witnessing GBVH offer a promising prevention strategy. Despite the increased focus on the importance of primary-level bystander interventions, limited efforts have been made to systematically synthesise research in this area. The present scoping review therefore sought to consolidate research on primary-level bystander interventions implemented in organisations by exploring the theoretical frameworks used to develop these interventions, determining outcomes, and examining facilitators and obstacles for their implementation. Five databases [Embase (Ovid), MEDLINE (Ovid), Scopus, Web of Science, and PsycINFO (Ovid)], and grey literature were systematically searched. Out of 11.302 references screened, 14 studies were included in the present scoping review. Findings suggest that primary-level bystander interventions, particularly bystander training workshops incorporating practice exercises, can increase prosocial bystander behaviour. However, the paucity of follow-up measurements makes it challenging to evaluate their long-term efficacy. The included studies underscore the importance of tailoring interventions to specific workplace contexts. While comprehensive program theories underpin most studies, organisational change theories were typically absent, even when interventions aimed to achieve cultural change. In conclusion, this review emphasises the significance of bystander interventions for primary GBVH prevention and underscores the need for further research to identify optimal practices and ensure enduring effectiveness. Systematic review registration: The protocol is registered on the Open Science Framework website at https://osf.io/3pt5k/.
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.