ArticleBMC nursing2025
Approaches to preventing workplace sexual harassment of nurses or minimising its adverse consequences: a scoping review.
Article in BMC nursing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundWorkplace sexual harassment of nurses is a common problem worldwide, influencing nurses’ well-being and the quality of patient care. Widely applicable recommendations and specific guidance for health care organisations are lacking. There is a need for systematically developed and evaluated interventions to prevent and mitigate sexual harassment of nurses. Hence, this study aims to identify existing approaches to preventing sexual harassment of nurses or minimising its adverse consequences at the individual, organisational and network levels to provide a basis for the development of appropriate interventions.
methodsA systematic scoping review was conducted, involving a systematic search of the literature in four medical databases in July 2024, complemented by a supplementary search including grey literature. All study designs and non-scientific sources referencing empirical or non-empirical research were included if they focused on nurses and approaches to preventing workplace sexual harassment or mitigating its adverse consequences. A thematic analysis was conducted, and a numerical summary was made to categorise the approaches and to quantify their frequency.
resultsOut of 3,912 records identified through database searches, 32 records published between 1984 and 2024 were included. Twelve followed the IMRAD (introduction, methods, results, and discussion) structure and were empirical. Of the twenty non-IMRAD records, only four included empirical data; the rest were theoretical or opinion based. Approaches to preventing sexual harassment of nurses or mitigating its consequences were situated at the individual or organisational levels, but none extended beyond a single organisation to address the network level. The approaches were analysed and categorised into eight domains: (1) ‘organisational culture’, (2) ‘infrastructure and working environment’, (3) ‘leadership’, (4) ‘guidelines’, (5) ‘reporting of incidents, (6) ‘education’, (7) ‘nurses’ approaches to reacting or coping’, and (8) ‘patient-centred approaches’.
conclusionA wide range of approaches at the individual and organisational levels are available to prevent sexual harassment of nurses or to minimise its adverse consequences, with education and reporting of incidents being the most frequently mentioned. However, for most of the approaches, research on their effectiveness and feasibility in practice is lacking. To systematically evaluate the approaches identified within different contexts, further research is needed.
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.