ArticleBMJ open2025
Understanding disclosures of sexual violence in Canadian postsecondary institutions: a scoping review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sexual violence disclosure in Canadian postsecondary educational institutions: a scoping review.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Breaking the silence: examining campus sexual violence and the psychological effects on women survivors.Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da U S P · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSexual violence remains a critical and under-reported issue in postsecondary institutions, impacting student health, well-being and academic outcomes. In Canada, over 90% of incidents are not disclosed to institutions; similar patterns are observed in the USA. Despite growing awareness of the issue, no comprehensive review has synthesised how Canadian evidence understands the disclosure of sexual violence in postsecondary settings. This scoping review addresses the question: 'what are the perceptions and experiences of disclosure processes of sexual violence in Canadian postsecondary institutions?'. The review will: (1) characterise existing perceptions of disclosure within Canadian postsecondary sexual violence evidence; (2) identify key sources and perspectives informing the evidence; (3) synthesise reported impacts of disclosure for students and (4) highlight gaps and research priorities to support the development of more effective, equitable and trauma-informed disclosure processes. The findings will inform student survivor-centred policies and practices in Canadian postsecondary institutions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This review follows Arksey and O'Malley's five-step scoping review framework, incorporating enhancements by Levac and colleagues. The methodology includes: (1) identifying relevant evidence through searches in PsycINFO, ERIC, Sociological Abstracts, Criminal Justice Abstracts and SCOPUS; (2) iterative evidence selection by two independent reviewers; (3) data extraction, abstract screening and full text review; (4) synthesising findings using reflexive thematic analysis guided by Braun and Clarke's framework and (5) summarising and reporting the results. Eligible sources include peer-reviewed and grey evidence published from December 2014 onward that focus on sexual violence in Canadian postsecondary contexts. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION : Ethical approval is not required as this study reviews existing literature. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews checklist will be used to guide translation of findings. Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and presented at conferences via abstract and presentation.
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.