ArticleBMC emergency medicine2026
Generational differences in perceptions and acceptance of violence in emergency rooms: a cross-sectional study in Thailand.
Article in BMC emergency medicine, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimViolence in hospital emergency rooms (ERs) presents serious risks to patient safety and healthcare workers. While prior research has focused on organizational risk factors, limited attention has been given to how the public interprets and accepts violent behavior, particularly across different generations. This study examined generational differences in perceptions and acceptance of violent behavior in hospital ERs in Thailand.
methodsA cross-sectional survey was conducted among 615 residents living in communities surrounding seven hospitals. Respondents were classified into four generational cohorts: Generation Z, Millennials, Generation X, and Baby Boomers. Data were collected using a structured questionnaire based on the Theory of Planned Behavior. Data analysis included descriptive statistics, Chi-square tests to examine severity classifications, and multiple regression analysis with dummy-coded generational variables (Baby Boomers as reference group) to examine the association between each generational cohort and acceptance of violence. Bias-corrected bootstrapping was employed to validate confidence intervals for all estimates.
resultsChi-square results indicated significant generational differences in how violence is defined; younger cohorts were more likely to label only physical assault as violence, while overlooking verbal aggression. Multiple regression analysis indicated that, relative to Baby Boomers (reference group), Generation Z (B = 0.263, β = 0.187, p = .019) and Millennials (B = 0.230, β = 0.155, p = .045) were significantly associated with higher acceptance of violent behavior in ERs, while Generation X did not differ significantly (B = 0.100, β = 0.062, p = .393). Overall model: F(3, 611) = 3.075, p = .027, R² = 0.015.
conclusionsGenerational background is significantly associated with differences in how individuals interpret and accept aggression in hospitals. Current Zero Tolerance policies may have limited effectiveness because younger demographics do not perceive verbal aggression as a violation. Prevention strategies may benefit from explicitly defining and prohibiting non-physical violence to align with the interpretive frameworks of younger generations. CLINICAL
trial registrationNot applicable.
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.