ArticleCanadian medical education journal2025
Anti-harassment policies across Canadian and international medical programs: strengths, areas for improvement, and a need for standardization.
Article in Canadian medical education journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- Against research: a case for the scholarship of application in Medical Education.Canadian medical education journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/Purpose: Medical trainee harassment is a global issue that has led to a multitude of detrimental effects. An important area of consideration is whether harassment policies are clear and available to all medical trainees globally. We aimed to develop a standardized rubric for evaluating anti-harassment policies and assess policies across Canadian medical schools and top international universities to identify strengths and areas for improvement. Methods: We constructed a rubric by synthesizing criteria from established frameworks on harassment policy effectiveness, adapting key elements to assess clarity, accessibility, and comprehensiveness in medical school policies. On March 2023, we evaluated 58 harassment policies from 16 Canadian medical schools and 31 policies from eight of the top 10 Quacquarelli Symonds (QS)-ranked universities. Our rubric, developed from four key frameworks, scored policies across three themes: (1) Policy Foundation, (2) Complaint Procedures, and (3) Resolution and Implementation. Results: Canadian universities performed well in foundational policy areas (average score 83.00% on Theme 1) but showed meaningful gaps in Complaint Procedures (48.75%) and Resolution and Implementation (39.38%). Top international QS-ranked universities similarly scored low in these latter themes, though they performed better on formal complaint processes. Key areas needing improvement include informal complaint procedures and timelines for response in Canadian universities, and policy revision commitments in top QS-ranked universities. Conclusions: This study highlights the need for enhanced anti-harassment policies, particularly in complaint and resolution procedures. Our rubric provides a structured approach for policy evaluation, enabling Canadian and potentially international institutions to improve policy clarity, accessibility, and comprehensiveness, fostering safer training environments.
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.