Table 4

Summary of the differences in resultant personal consequences by bullying categorya

Bullying categoryGreater prevalence  
compared to verbal only
Lower prevalence  
compared to verbal only
Non-significant difference
Sexual harassmentLeaving program (OR = 6.0; 95% CI: 2.7, 13.6; P < .001)
Substance use (OR = 4.3; 95% CI: 2.6, 7.2; P < .001)
Weight change (OR = 2.4; 95% CI: 1.5, 3.7; P < .001)
Depression (OR = 2.2; 95% CI: 1.4, 3.2; P < .001)
None of the specified consequences (OR = 0.2; 95% CI: 0.1, 1.0; P = .048)Decline in performance
Burnout
Improvement in performance
Physical harassmentImprovement in performance (OR = 2.3; 95% CI: 1.3, 4.1; P = .003)Burnout (OR = 0.4; 95% CI: 0.3, 0.6; P < .001)Decline in performance
Depression
Leaving program
Weight change
Substance use
None of the specified consequences
Other type of harassmentLeaving program (OR = 1.8; 95% CI: 1.0, 3.3; P = .037)
None of the specified consequences (OR = 2.0; 95% CI: 1.6, 2.6; P < .001)
Burnout (OR = 0.6; 95% CI: 0.5, 0.7; P < .001)
Decline in performance (OR = 0.8; 95% CI: 0.66, 0.95; P = .012)
Depression
Weight change
Substance use
Improvement in performance
Bullying categoryGreater prevalence  
compared to verbal only
Lower prevalence  
compared to verbal only
Non-significant difference
Sexual harassmentLeaving program (OR = 6.0; 95% CI: 2.7, 13.6; P < .001)
Substance use (OR = 4.3; 95% CI: 2.6, 7.2; P < .001)
Weight change (OR = 2.4; 95% CI: 1.5, 3.7; P < .001)
Depression (OR = 2.2; 95% CI: 1.4, 3.2; P < .001)
None of the specified consequences (OR = 0.2; 95% CI: 0.1, 1.0; P = .048)Decline in performance
Burnout
Improvement in performance
Physical harassmentImprovement in performance (OR = 2.3; 95% CI: 1.3, 4.1; P = .003)Burnout (OR = 0.4; 95% CI: 0.3, 0.6; P < .001)Decline in performance
Depression
Leaving program
Weight change
Substance use
None of the specified consequences
Other type of harassmentLeaving program (OR = 1.8; 95% CI: 1.0, 3.3; P = .037)
None of the specified consequences (OR = 2.0; 95% CI: 1.6, 2.6; P < .001)
Burnout (OR = 0.6; 95% CI: 0.5, 0.7; P < .001)
Decline in performance (OR = 0.8; 95% CI: 0.66, 0.95; P = .012)
Depression
Weight change
Substance use
Improvement in performance

aORs are from logistic regression models. The “verbal only” harassment type served as the reference category. All models controlled for gender. All regression models examined for adequate fit according to chi-square likelihood statistics.

Table 4

Summary of the differences in resultant personal consequences by bullying categorya

Bullying categoryGreater prevalence  
compared to verbal only
Lower prevalence  
compared to verbal only
Non-significant difference
Sexual harassmentLeaving program (OR = 6.0; 95% CI: 2.7, 13.6; P < .001)
Substance use (OR = 4.3; 95% CI: 2.6, 7.2; P < .001)
Weight change (OR = 2.4; 95% CI: 1.5, 3.7; P < .001)
Depression (OR = 2.2; 95% CI: 1.4, 3.2; P < .001)
None of the specified consequences (OR = 0.2; 95% CI: 0.1, 1.0; P = .048)Decline in performance
Burnout
Improvement in performance
Physical harassmentImprovement in performance (OR = 2.3; 95% CI: 1.3, 4.1; P = .003)Burnout (OR = 0.4; 95% CI: 0.3, 0.6; P < .001)Decline in performance
Depression
Leaving program
Weight change
Substance use
None of the specified consequences
Other type of harassmentLeaving program (OR = 1.8; 95% CI: 1.0, 3.3; P = .037)
None of the specified consequences (OR = 2.0; 95% CI: 1.6, 2.6; P < .001)
Burnout (OR = 0.6; 95% CI: 0.5, 0.7; P < .001)
Decline in performance (OR = 0.8; 95% CI: 0.66, 0.95; P = .012)
Depression
Weight change
Substance use
Improvement in performance
Bullying categoryGreater prevalence  
compared to verbal only
Lower prevalence  
compared to verbal only
Non-significant difference
Sexual harassmentLeaving program (OR = 6.0; 95% CI: 2.7, 13.6; P < .001)
Substance use (OR = 4.3; 95% CI: 2.6, 7.2; P < .001)
Weight change (OR = 2.4; 95% CI: 1.5, 3.7; P < .001)
Depression (OR = 2.2; 95% CI: 1.4, 3.2; P < .001)
None of the specified consequences (OR = 0.2; 95% CI: 0.1, 1.0; P = .048)Decline in performance
Burnout
Improvement in performance
Physical harassmentImprovement in performance (OR = 2.3; 95% CI: 1.3, 4.1; P = .003)Burnout (OR = 0.4; 95% CI: 0.3, 0.6; P < .001)Decline in performance
Depression
Leaving program
Weight change
Substance use
None of the specified consequences
Other type of harassmentLeaving program (OR = 1.8; 95% CI: 1.0, 3.3; P = .037)
None of the specified consequences (OR = 2.0; 95% CI: 1.6, 2.6; P < .001)
Burnout (OR = 0.6; 95% CI: 0.5, 0.7; P < .001)
Decline in performance (OR = 0.8; 95% CI: 0.66, 0.95; P = .012)
Depression
Weight change
Substance use
Improvement in performance

aORs are from logistic regression models. The “verbal only” harassment type served as the reference category. All models controlled for gender. All regression models examined for adequate fit according to chi-square likelihood statistics.

Close
This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

Close

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

View Article Abstract & Purchase Options

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Close