TY - JOUR
T1 - Incidence and Group Comparisons of Harassment Based on Gender, LGBTQ+ Identity, and Race at an Academic Medical Center
AU - Vargas, Emily A.
AU - Brassel, Sheila T.
AU - Perumalswami, Chithra R.
AU - Johnson, Timothy R.B.
AU - Jagsi, Reshma
AU - Cortina, Lilia M.
AU - Settles, Isis H.
N1 - Funding Information:
Authors T.R.B.J. and L.M.C. were on the NASEM report cited in the study without financial conflict. R.J. has received personal fees from Amgen and Vizient and grants for unrelated work from the National Institutes of Health, the Doris Duke Foundation, the Greenwall Foundation, the Komen Foundation, and Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan for the Michigan Radiation Oncology Quality Consortium, as well as stock options for advising Equity Quotient, a company that evaluates culture in health care companies. C.R.P. has received grants outside the submitted work by the National Institutes of Health and the University of Michigan Office of Research. No competing financial interests exist for authors I.H.S., S.T.B., and E.A.V.
Funding Information:
The authors thank the research participants for taking the time to complete the surveys. The authors thank all funders of the study, including the Center for Bioethics and Social Sciences in Medicine (CBSSM), the ADVANCE program, and the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology (OBGYN) at the University of Michigan. Starting at the time of data analysis and article preparation, E.A.V. is funded by the T32 Research Training Program in Cardiovascular Disease Epidemiology and Prevention at Northwestern University, Department of Preventive Medicine.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021, Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers.
PY - 2021/6
Y1 - 2021/6
N2 - Background: A key recommendation from the landmark National Academies report called for research examining experiences of underrepresented and/or vulnerable groups, including people of color and sexual-and gender-minority people. We examine the prevalence of gender policing harassment (GPH), heterosexist harassment (HH), and racialized sexual harassment (RSH), by gender, LGBTQ+, race, and department grouping, which has not been previously examined in academic medicine. Materials and Methods: All faculty (n = 2723), fellows, residents, and first through third year medical students (n = 1822) at the University of Michigan Medical School (UMMS) who had been working at the organization for at least 1 year were invited to complete a 20-minute online survey. We assessed harassment within the past year, perpetrated by insiders (i.e., staff, students, and faculty) and from patients and patients' families. Results: A total of 705 faculty (25.9% of the targeted sample) and 583 trainees (32.0% of the targeted sample) were in the analytic sample. Women were significantly more likely to experience GPH from both sources than men, and LGBTQ+ individuals were more likely to face HH from both sources than cisgender heterosexual participants. Underrepresented minorities, Asian/Asian American, and female participants had higher rates of RSH perpetrated by insiders. There were significant department-group differences across harassment types. Conclusions: Less-studied forms of harassment are common within academic medicine and are perpetrated from various sources. Identity-based harassment should be investigated further to gain a comprehensive understanding of its impact within academic medicine. Clinical Trial Registration Number not applicable.
AB - Background: A key recommendation from the landmark National Academies report called for research examining experiences of underrepresented and/or vulnerable groups, including people of color and sexual-and gender-minority people. We examine the prevalence of gender policing harassment (GPH), heterosexist harassment (HH), and racialized sexual harassment (RSH), by gender, LGBTQ+, race, and department grouping, which has not been previously examined in academic medicine. Materials and Methods: All faculty (n = 2723), fellows, residents, and first through third year medical students (n = 1822) at the University of Michigan Medical School (UMMS) who had been working at the organization for at least 1 year were invited to complete a 20-minute online survey. We assessed harassment within the past year, perpetrated by insiders (i.e., staff, students, and faculty) and from patients and patients' families. Results: A total of 705 faculty (25.9% of the targeted sample) and 583 trainees (32.0% of the targeted sample) were in the analytic sample. Women were significantly more likely to experience GPH from both sources than men, and LGBTQ+ individuals were more likely to face HH from both sources than cisgender heterosexual participants. Underrepresented minorities, Asian/Asian American, and female participants had higher rates of RSH perpetrated by insiders. There were significant department-group differences across harassment types. Conclusions: Less-studied forms of harassment are common within academic medicine and are perpetrated from various sources. Identity-based harassment should be investigated further to gain a comprehensive understanding of its impact within academic medicine. Clinical Trial Registration Number not applicable.
KW - academic medicine
KW - gender harassment
KW - heterosexist harassment
KW - racialized sexual harassment
KW - sexual harassment
KW - workplace
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85108090676&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85108090676&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1089/jwh.2020.8553
DO - 10.1089/jwh.2020.8553
M3 - Article
C2 - 33216670
AN - SCOPUS:85108090676
VL - 30
SP - 789
EP - 798
JO - Journal of Women's Health
JF - Journal of Women's Health
SN - 1540-9996
IS - 6
ER -