Background Racial and ethnic diversity of healthcare workers have benefits on team functioning and patient care. However, a significant barrier to retaining diverse providers is discrimination. Objective To assess the predictors, perpetrators, and narratives of racial discrimination among healthcare workers. Design Survey study. Participants Healthcare workers employed at academic hospitals. Main Measures We assessed prevalence and perpetrators of racial and ethnic discrimination using the General Ethnic Discrimination Scale. We included an open-ended question asking respondents to recount experiences of discrimination and analyzed responses using grounded theory. Key Results Of the 997 participants, 12.2% were females from backgrounds underrepresented in medicine (URM), 4.0% URM males, 10.1% Asian females, 4.7% Asian males, 49.1% non-Hispanic White females, and 19.8% non-Hispanic White males. Among healthcare workers of color, 85.2% reported discrimination. Over half of URM females (51.4%), URM males (52.6%), and Asian females (62.5%) reported discrimination by patients. About 20–25% of URM females, URM males, and Asian females reported discrimination by teachers, supervisors, co-workers, and institutions. In adjusted binary logistic models, URM females had 10.14 odds (95% confidence interval [95%CI]: 5.13, 20.02, p <.001), URM males 6.23 odds (95%CI: 2.59, 14.98, p <.001), Asian females 7.90 odds (95%CI: 4.07, 15.33, p <.001), and Asian males 2.96 odds (95% CI: 1.47, 5.97, p =.002) of reporting discrimination compared with non-Hispanic White males. Needing more support was associated with 2.51 odds (95%CI: 1.54, 4.08, p <.001) of reporting discrimination. Our qualitative findings identified that the murder of George Floyd intensified URM healthcare workers’ experiences of discrimination through increased fear of violence and requests for unpaid diversity work. Asian healthcare workers reported that pandemic-related anti-Asian violence shaped their experiences of discrimination through increased fear of violence and care refusal from patients. Conclusions Our findings provide insights into experienced discrimination among healthcare workers and opportunities for hospitals to create programs that improve inclusivity.

Background Gender discrimination among women healthcare workers (HCWs) negatively impacts job satisfaction, mental health, and career development; however, few studies have explored how experiences of gender discrimination change during times of health system strain. Thus, we conducted a survey study to characterize gender discrimination during a time of significant health system strain, i.e., the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods We used a convenience sampling approach by inviting department chairs of academic medical centers in the United States to forward our online survey to their staff in January 2021. The survey included one item assessing frequency of gender discrimination, and an open-ended question asking respondents to detail experiences of discrimination. The survey also included questions about social and work stressors, such as needing additional childcare support. We used ordinal logistic regression models to identify predictors of gender discrimination, and grounded theory to characterize themes that emerged from open-ended responses. Results Among our sample of 716 women (mean age = 37.63 years, SD = 10.97), 521 (72.80%) were White, 102 (14.20%) Asian, 69 (9.60%) Black, 53 (7.4%) Latina, and 11 (1.50%) identified as another race. In an adjusted model that included demographic characteristics and social and work stressors as covariates, significant predictors of higher gender discrimination included younger age (OR = 0.98, 95%CI = 0.96, 0.99); greater support needs (OR = 1.26, 95%CI = 1.09,1.47); lower team cohesion (OR = 0.94, 95%CI = 0.91, 0.97); greater racial discrimination (OR = 1.07, 95%CI = 1.05,1.09); identifying as a physician (OR = 6.59, 95%CI = 3.95, 11.01), physician-in-training (i.e., residents and fellows; OR = 3.85, 95%CI = 2.27,6.52), or non-clinical worker (e.g., administrative assistants; OR = 3.08, 95%CI = 1.60,5.90), compared with nurses; and reporting the need for a lot more childcare support (OR = 1.84, 95%CI = 1.15, 2.97), compared with reporting no childcare support need. In their open-ended responses, women HCWs described seven themes: 1) belittlement by colleagues, 2) gendered workload distributions, 3) unequal opportunities for professional advancement, 4) expectations for communication, 5) objectification, 6) expectations of motherhood, and 7) mistreatment by patients. Conclusions Our study underscores the severity of gender discrimination among women HCWs. Hospital systems should prioritize gender equity programs that improve workplace climate during and outside of times of health system strain.

No abstract

Introduction Family-level psychosocial factors appear to play a critical role in mediating the intergenerational transmission of trauma; however, no review article has quantitatively synthesized causal mechanisms across a diversity of trauma types. This study aims to systematically consolidate the epidemiological research on family-level psychosocial mediators and moderators to ultimately produce causal diagram(s) of the intergenerational transmission of trauma. Methods We will identify epidemiological peer-reviewed publications, dissertations, and conference abstracts that measure the impact of at least one psychosocial family-level factor mediating or moderating the relationship between parental trauma exposure and a child mental health outcome. English, French, Kinyarwanda, and Spanish articles will be eligible. We will search MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PTSDpubs, Scopus, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses and will conduct forward citation chaining of included documents. Two reviewers will perform screening independently. We will extract reported mediators, moderators, and relevant study characteristics for included studies. Findings will be presented using narrative syntheses, descriptive analyses, mediation meta-analyses, moderating meta-analyses, and causal diagram(s), where possible. We will perform a risk of bias assessment and will assess for publication bias. Discussion The development of evidence-based causal diagram(s) would provide more detailed understanding of the paths by which the psychological impacts of trauma can be transmitted intergenerationally at the family-level. This review could provide evidence to better support interventions that interrupt the cycle of intergenerational trauma. Trial registration Systematic review registration: PROSPERO registration ID #CRD42021251053.

Introduction: Psychosocial factors within the family appear to play a critical role in mediating the intergenerational transmission of trauma; however, there has yet to be a review article that quantitatively synthesizes causal mechanisms across a diversity of trauma-types. This study aims to systematically consolidate the epidemiological research on family-level psychosocial mediators and moderators to ultimately produce causal diagram(s) in the intergenerational transmission of trauma. Methods and analysis: We will identify epidemiological peer-reviewed publications, dissertations, and conference abstracts that measure the impact of at least one psychosocial family-level factor mediating or moderating the relationship between parental trauma exposure and a child mental health outcome. English, French, Kinyarwanda, and Spanish articles will be eligible. We searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PTSDpubs, Scopus and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses and will conduct forward citation chaining of included documents. Two reviewers will perform screening and data extraction independently. We will extract reported mediators, moderators, and relevant study characteristics for included studies. Findings will be presented using narrative syntheses, descriptive analyses, mediation meta-analyses, moderating meta-analyses, and causal diagram(s), where possible. We will also perform a risk of bias assessment for studies included in meta-analyses and will construct a funnel plot to assess publication bias. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval is not needed for this review. Results will be presented at academic conferences and published in a peer-reviewed journal in hopes to inform the development and evaluation of resilience-building interventions.