A Rapid Review on Complaint Mechanisms for Interpersonal Violence: Integrating Research-Based Recommendations from Multiple Sectors to Inform Sport Settings

Abstract

Past studies have highlighted the lack of independent formal complaint mechanisms as one of the most significant barriers to reporting interpersonal violence (IV) in sport. Some countries have since implemented complaint mechanisms specific to sport settings. Evaluations of similar mechanisms in other sectors could inform the development and implementation of complaint mechanisms for IV in sport. This rapid review included studies inside and outside the sport context to document the characteristics of complaint mechanisms of IV, barriers or limitations related to such mechanisms, and recommendations resulting from their evaluation. Following the Cochrane Rapid Reviews Interim Guidance, six databases were searched for peer-reviewed references in English or French, published between 2012 and 2022, and pertaining to the evaluation of formal reporting mechanisms of IV. The 35 references covered mechanisms mainly targeting IV in general (any type) or sexual violence specifically. Complaint mechanisms varied in scope and as a function of their setting, including work, university, military, and medical. We identified barriers and limitations concerning fear of consequences, lack of knowledge, lack of efficiency, lack of trust, and unsupportive culture. Finally, we documented 18 recommendations to improve complaint mechanisms of IV, spanning four categories: (a) organizational accountability, (b) awareness and accessibility, (c) adapted process, and (d) ongoing evaluation. This rapid review draws recommendations from various research disciplines and types of mechanisms to offer a comprehensive portrait of best practices. The findings show that numerous aspects of complaint mechanisms at multiple levels should be considered when developing and implementing complaint mechanisms of IV.

Keywords

complaint mechanism interpersonal violence evaluation recommendations sport

Complaint Mechanisms for Interpersonal Violence (IV): What can Sport Settings Learn from Research-Based Recommendations?

IV in sport has been reported in research studies (e.g., Pankowiak et al., 2023; Parent & Vaillancourt-Morel, 2020) as well as in the media (Burke, 2023; Hall, 2023). In response, governing bodies throughout the world have been elaborating different prevention strategies (e.g., U.S. Center for SafeSport, 2022) as well as implementing various structures to support reporting of IV in sport (e.g., Vertommen et al., 2015). A few countries have implemented a formal complaint mechanism specific to sport settings (e.g., Sport Integrity Australia, 2023). Research on how to develop and implement these mechanisms is scarce, which leaves governing bodies with little information on which to base their decisions. Yet, complaint mechanisms for IV exist in multiple sectors other than sport, such as work or medical settings. The recommendations stemming from evaluative studies of complaint mechanisms outside of the sport context could offer cues to inform the development and implementation of similar mechanisms inside of sport. This rapid review aimed to document the characteristics of complaint mechanisms of IV in various sectors (related or not to sport), related barriers or limitations, as well as recommendations resulting from their evaluation. While the results from this review can be useful in various domains, they will be presented with a specific focus on sport settings, given the need to establish guidelines in this sector.

Literature Review

Whether in a recreational or high-performance context, in childhood or adulthood, the prevalence of IV in sport can no longer be denied. Research has shown that important proportions of sport participants have experienced at least one situation of IV in this context (Hartill et al., 2021; Pankowiak et al., 2023; Parent & Vaillancourt-Morel, 2020; Vertommen et al., 2016). In a recent study conducted with 10,302 adults from six European countries, 75% of participants mentioned that they had at least one experience of IV in sport during their childhood (Hartill et al., 2021). Experiencing IV in sport is associated with several consequences, such as psychological distress, post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms, and lower self-esteem for adolescents (Parent et al., 2022) as well as lower quality of life and mental health in adulthood (Daignault et al., 2023; Vertommen et al., 2018). Emerging research suggests that only a minority of sport participants who experience IV in this context will formally report the incident (Hartill et al., 2021; Tuakli-Wosornu et al., 2023; Willson et al., 2022). The absence of a formal and independent complaint mechanism was one of the most frequently mentioned barriers to reporting an experience of IV in sport (Bjørnseth & Szabo, 2018; McLaren et al., 2020; Willson et al., 2022). Indeed, researchers and people involved in sport have long been advocating for a standardized and independent complaint mechanism (Gurgis & Kerr, 2021; Kerr et al., 2020; McLaren et al., 2020; Rhind et al., 2014).

There is generally a distinction made between disclosing, which consists of revealing one’s experience of IV to someone in one’s close environment, such as a friend or family member, and reporting, which consists of using a formal mechanism to file a complaint or to access help resources (Woessner et al., 2023). On an individual level, disclosing an experience of IV represents an important step in one’s healing journey (Jeong & Cha, 2019). On an organizational level, reporting can contribute to recognizing, intervening, and preventing IV (Mennicke et al., 2021; Stoner & Cramer, 2019). In a recent study focused on disclosure, less than half (46%) of the participants who had experienced IV in sport during their childhood had disclosed the situation to an adult (Woessner et al., 2023). This proportion was in line with previously documented reporting rates of IV in Canadian national team athletes (Willson, 2019). Among the participants who had experienced IV in sport, only 44% of current and 48% of retired athletes had disclosed it to someone (Willson, 2019). The proportions were even lower for participants who had reported through a formal complaint mechanism, to 16% of current and 13% of retired athletes (Willson, 2019). Reasons evoked for not reporting included fear of repercussions, limited trust in their sport organization, and normalization of IV in sport (Willson et al., 2022). These barriers were similar to those found in research analyzing IV in contexts outside sport (Alaggia et al., 2019; Mennicke et al., 2021; Stoner & Cramer, 2019).

A few countries and regions have recently implemented independent complaint mechanisms for IV in sport, such as the Office of the Sport Integrity Commissioner in Canada (2022a, 2022b), Sport Integrity Australia in Australia (2023), and the Sport and Recreation Complaints and Mediation Service in New Zealand (2023). While these entities seem promising, their recent creation limits our understanding of their functioning and efficiency. Two other mechanisms have been operating for a more extended period, namely the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSCPP) Child Protection in Sport Unit, which has existed in the United Kingdom since 2001, and the U.S. Center for SafeSport, which has existed since 2017. Both structures offer various services, including educational material, IV reporting, and sport organization auditing (MacPherson et al., 2022). The U.S. Center for SafeSport can directly receive a complaint and investigate through its Response & Resolution team if the complaint is deemed eligible (Johnson et al., 2020). The Child Protection in Sport Unit (2023) functions differently by providing reporting flowcharts and case management tools. However, complaints are referred to the police or the country’s child protective services for further investigation.

To our knowledge, none of the complaint mechanisms of IV in sport, either recent or established, have been evaluated regarding their implementation or efficacy. A few studies have been conducted on reports of IV made through the complaint mechanisms, which informs us on the nature of the incidents but not on the mechanisms’ internal processes. In one instance, data from the U.S. Center for SafeSport Centralized Disciplinary Database identified an association between reports of sexual violence and sport with low clothing coverage, individual disciplines, and mixed-gender events (Naushad et al., 2021). In the UK, researchers compiled official reports of IV toward children in sport, as received by local authorities, the regional entry point of the child protective services (Hartill & Lang, 2018). Only 46% of the 151 local authorities provided the information requested by the researchers, which underlined the lack of accessibility of the data. Of the 1,013 reports analyzed, 47.4% concerned sexual abuse, 19.7% physical abuse, 3.5% emotional abuse, and 2.6% neglect (Hartill & Lang, 2018). Since these proportions were different from those of prevalence studies where sexual violence is much less reported, the researchers concluded that reporting of IV was limited in sport, especially experiences of emotional violence and neglect. These findings shed light on some aspects of reporting IV in sport yet offer very little information on the internal processes of the complaint mechanisms. In one descriptive article on the U.S. Center for SafeSport, the authors mentioned that the organization was too recent for an evaluation (Johnson et al., 2020). Researchers discussing the NSCPP Child Protection in Sport Unit argued that the lack of independent and systematic evaluation of the structure hindered the development of knowledge and practices to improve prevention of IV in sport (Hartill & O’Gorman, 2014). Altogether, this literature underlines the need for evaluating the complaint mechanisms available in sport to report IV.

Evaluation is defined as “the process of systematically gathering empirical data and contextual information about an intervention program—specifically answers to what, who, how, whether, and why questions that will assist in assessing a program’s planning, implementation, and/or effectiveness” (Chen, 2015, p. 6). This definition argues that evaluation could and should be adapted to a program’s state of development and maturity. That is to say that any program, no matter its recency, could be evaluated to improve its functioning and support other organizations interested in similar programs (Chen, 2015; Rossi et al., 2004). As mentioned, research concerning formal reporting of IV in sport is sparse. In one exception, a recent study used an evaluation approach to investigate the publicly available information from the UK Child Protection in Sport Unit, the U.S. Center for SafeSport, and Sport Integrity Australia (MacPherson et al., 2022). The results showed that the three organizations offered resources related to reporting mechanisms (internally or externally) as well as support for complainants. However, only the U.S. Center for SafeSport could provide independent investigations, enforceable sanctions, and a public database of delivered sanctions (MacPherson et al., 2022). Other limitations were identified, such as the absence of neglect in the forms of IV recognized by the U.S. Center for SafeSport or the access to Sport Integrity Australia limited to affiliated sport organizations (MacPherson et al., 2022). These findings offer an important first glimpse of the complaint mechanisms’ processes but remain limited in their scope. More research is needed to document the organizations’ functioning and support future initiatives on IV in sport.

Since there are few studies on formal complaint mechanisms of IV in sport, research in other domains could help inform the work in this area. Research outside sport has typically focused on reporting one form of violence (e.g., child sexual abuse, Alagia et al., 2019) or on reporting in a specific setting (e.g., universities, Mennicke et al., 2021), which limits our understanding of commonalities between reporting processes. Complaint mechanisms for incidents of IV exist in numerous settings, such as the workplace (Bjørkelo et al., 2021), healthcare (McTavish et al., 2017), schools and universities (D’Antuono, 2021), or the military (Macaraeg, 2016). However, research on such complaint mechanisms is usually fragmented, and, to our knowledge, no previous review of the literature has taken a broad approach to integrate findings from multiple sectors. Recommendations from evaluations of complaint mechanisms in other domains could identify key ingredients to consider when developing and implementing complaint mechanisms for IV in sport or other sectors. The present review aimed to document the characteristics of complaint mechanisms of IV, barriers or limitations related to such mechanisms, as well as recommendations resulting from their evaluation through a rapid review of the literature.

Method

This rapid review followed the Cochrane Rapid Reviews Interim Guidance (Garritty et al., 2021), accelerating the literature review process to develop a valuable and valid knowledge synthesis (Hamel et al., 2021). To streamline the procedure, rapid reviews are based on rigorous protocols that begin with a precise research question, which is answered by simplified search strategy, data extraction, and quality appraisal (Watt et al., 2008).

Search Strategy

The search strategy was developed in consultation with a librarian to identify existing scientific literature on two main concepts: “reporting mechanisms” and “interpersonal violence” (see Table 1 for a list of keywords used). The search was conducted between August and December 2022 on five online databases (SPORTDiscus, Pubmed, PsychNET, ProQuest Dissertation and Thesis, Human Resources Abstracts, and Sociology Abstracts) to reflect different fields in which complaint mechanisms might have been studied. Specific parameters related to language, year of publication, and type of reference were used as inclusion criteria to narrow the results obtained. First, only peer-reviewed scientific articles and thesis dissertations published in English or French were considered since the researchers were fluent in these languages. Second, the search of online databases was limited to studies published in the previous decade (2012–2022). This choice was made to identify references coherent with the current historical, social, and political contexts (e.g., social norms regarding IV, #MeToo movement). Third, only research pertaining to the evaluation of formal reporting mechanisms of IV was selected. Studies related to professional errors or national policies on violence prevention were excluded. After excluding duplicates, 239 references were exported to the Covidence systematic review software (see Supplemental Material Appendix A for the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses – PRISMA flowchart, Page et al., 2021).

Table 1.

Search Categories and Keywords.

Complaint Mechanism	Interpersonal Violence
Complaint system	Abuse
Complaint process	Maltreatment
Complaint resolution	Neglect
Complaint examination	Victimisation
Complaint procedure	Harm
Complaint report	Bullying
Complaint disclosure	Aggression
Complaint litigation	Harassment
Complaint management	Safeguarding
Whistleblowing
Reporting channel
Complaint handling
Receive complaint
Complaint policy
Complaint protocol
Reporting process
Reporting procedure
Reporting mechanism

Study Screening and Selection

Titles, abstracts, and full texts were screened by two authors (SR and ESP) using Covidence. One began by screening the titles to identify the relevant references, which resulted in 198 documents. The two authors then independently screened 20% of the abstracts to ensure a common understanding of the inclusion criteria. Disagreements were discussed and resolved through consensus. Subsequently, one of the authors (ESP) reviewed the remaining abstracts, while the other (SR) reviewed the excluded references to validate the choices (Garritty et al., 2021). There were 102 references went on to full-text screening. The two authors independently screened ten based on a full-text review and discussed disagreements. The same process was followed as in the previous step, where one author reviewed the remaining articles and the other validated the exclusions. Weekly meetings were held to discuss potential difficulties throughout the process. After further consultation with the librarian and with the lead investigator (SP), the references were included in the review if they satisfied the additional following inclusion criteria: (a) the complaint mechanism was mentioned in the research objectives, and (b) there were specific recommendations targeting the complaint mechanism. These choices were made to include only research that focused on the rapid review’s objective, as we noticed that certain studies were only marginally related. A total of 35 references met all the inclusion criteria.

Data Extraction and Quality Assessment

Data extraction was conducted using a form developed on Covidence to highlight relevant data. As Garritty et al. (2021) recommended, we restricted the amount of information extracted. For each study, we identified general information (title, date, authors), the design used (including sample and method), complaint mechanism evaluated, type(s) of IV addressed by the mechanism, barriers, and limitations related to the complaint mechanisms, and main recommendations that resulted from the evaluation. One author performed most of the data extraction while the other read through each extraction form and validated that the data was complete and accurate.

Quality assessment of the references was performed with the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool (Hong et al., 2018; Pace et al., 2012). This tool was developed to provide specific methodological quality for mixed studies reviews, including qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods studies. The developers discourage using a score to compare studies and suggest instead using their tool as a critical appraisal tool. There are two screening questions for all types of designs (clarity of the research questions and presence of collected data to address research questions) and five criteria specific to five different study designs. Each study was analyzed based on whether it used a qualitative, quantitative-randomized controlled trial, quantitative-non-randomized, quantitative-descriptive, or mixed methods design. Most studies (n = 25) showed adequate quality where all the required criteria were present. A few studies (n = 9) lacked sufficient information to be able to evaluate their quality. Finally, one study obtained a mixed evaluation, with some criteria present and others absent (see Supplemental Material Appendix B for the complete quality assessment).

Data Analysis Process

The types of complaint mechanisms and the forms of IV addressed by the mechanisms were categorized following discussions between the two authors in charge of the analysis as well as with the principal investigator. The barriers and limitations related to the complaint mechanisms and the recommendations were organized using a narrative synthesis to identify broad categories based on the extracted data (Popay et al., 2006).

Results

Study Characteristics

The 35 references were published between 2012 and 2022, with the majority (n = 22) published after 2017 (see Supplemental Material Appendix C for a full description). There were 22 peer-reviewed research articles, 11 doctoral dissertations, and two book chapters. Most of the studies were conducted in the United States (n = 22), a few in Australia (n = 4) or the United Kingdom (n = 3), and one each in New Zealand and Turkey. The four remaining were literature reviews, which included studies from multiple countries. Most research used qualitative methodologies (n = 23), while a few were literature reviews (n = 5), used mixed methods (n = 3) or a quantitative non-randomized design (n = 3). One study used a quantitative-descriptive design. The 35 references included in the review are identified with an asterisk in the reference list.

Characteristics of Complaint Mechanisms

The references included in the review covered various types of mechanisms that targeted different forms of IV. Many studies concerned college or university complaint mechanisms (n = 8) or mandatory reporting (n = 7). Of the papers on mandatory reporting, five covered children, while two covered elders. Some references targeted para-governmental or governmental complaint mechanisms (n = 5), such as one concerning federal judiciary employees in the United States (Martin, 2022). A few studies were on workplace (n = 4) or healthcare (n = 3) complaint mechanisms. Finally, the review identified papers on sport (n = 2), military (n = 2), and prison (n = 1) complaint mechanisms or the police force (n = 1). The last two involved contexts with multiple complaint mechanisms. Gupta et al. (2018) focused on IV occurring in psychiatric healthcare settings, which included healthcare, police force, and para/government complaint mechanisms. Ullman’s (2019) study concerned the Office of Civil Rights, a para/governmental mechanism complaint mechanism that also intersected with college and university mechanisms.

Most complaint mechanisms focused on IV in general (n = 15), meaning all forms of IV, or specifically on sexual violence (n = 13). A few complaint mechanisms covered bullying (n = 4), while one concerned domestic violence. The two remaining articles were on the same complaint mechanism targeting cyber violence (Cross, 2018a; 2018b). The complaint mechanisms served various groups, including athletes, university students, and employees, mandated reporters in education, and the general population. Detailed descriptions of each complaint mechanism and its targeted population are provided in Supplemental Material Appendix C.

Barriers or Limitations Related to Complaint Mechanisms

Almost all the references (n = 33, 94%) mentioned aspects identified by actors¹ of organizations as barriers to access or limitations related to the mechanism. These barriers and limitations were organized into five categories: fear of consequences, lack of knowledge, lack of efficiency, lack of trust, and unsupportive culture (see Table 2).

Table 2.

Description of Barriers and Limitations Related to Complaint Mechanism.

Category	Number of References^a	Definition
Fear of consequences	29	References mentioned the participants’ fear of potential repercussions from using the complaint mechanism. These could be physical or psychological retaliation by the person being reported. Participants also discussed potential professional or academic consequences, the risk of being labeled a “snitch,” or potential re-traumatization.
Lack of knowledge	24	Researchers identified a lack of understanding of the complaint mechanism, such as the reporting process or the types of behaviors to report. This could be related to individual lack of knowledge, ambiguity within the mechanism, and insufficient support resources.
Lack of efficiency	22	References described the complaint mechanisms as lacking practicality, given the length and complexity of the process. Many problems were observed concerning communication throughout and after the process with the actors as well as between agencies.
Lack of trust	21	References discussed that participants believed that the complaint mechanism did not function properly. They feared a potential lack of anonymity or of not being believed within the system. One reference mentioned the influence of past public scandals.
Unsupportive culture	19	References described a culture of silence that hindered reporting. In some instances, there was a normalization of abusive behavior and a perception that the organization's culture (e.g., medical, sport) accepted violence.

There was a total of 35 references.

Fear of Consequences

Most papers (n = 29, 83%) mentioned that people feared the consequences that could result from using the complaint mechanism. This was related to the fear of negative repercussions, whether psychological (e.g., bullying) or physical (e.g., threats to one’s physical safety) after reporting. In many cases, participants described possible retaliation from the person being reported to the complaint mechanism. Other potential consequences identified were the possibility of being labeled a “snitch” and being ridiculed for using the complaint mechanism, which was mentioned in contexts of prison (Elliott, 2022) and sport (Hermandorfer, 2015; Newman et al., 2022). Actors sometimes worried about consequences for their academic or professional careers, especially if the person reported was a superior (Gamble Blakey et al., 2019). A few authors discussed the fear of re-traumatization through the complaint process for people who experienced workplace bullying (Bjørkelo et al., 2021) or sexual violence (D’Antuono, 2021; Ullman, 2019).

Lack of Knowledge

Numerous references (n = 24, 69%) highlighted that people sometimes lacked essential knowledge concerning the complaint mechanism, which hindered their ability to use it. This was sometimes discussed as an issue that concerned the actors themselves, as lacking understanding of certain aspects of the mechanism. The lack of knowledge could also be related to ambiguity within the mechanism of what constituted violent incidents that should be reported. The studies reviewed also mentioned the absence or paucity of resources to support people in developing their knowledge about the complaint mechanism and IV more generally.

Lack of Efficiency

The lack of efficiency of the complaint mechanism was identified as a barrier or limitation in numerous studies (n = 22, 63%). Actors discussed a lack of practicality, including the amount of time, the complexity of reporting, and the slow progression once the complaint was in the system. Many papers identified communication deficiencies, whether concerning the lack of follow-up through the complaint process, from the initial reporting to the investigation results. Lack of communication between agencies involved in the complaint process was also mentioned (Cross, 2018b; Donaldson, 2019; Oloumi-Johnson, 2016).

Lack of Trust

Several references (n = 21, 60%) identified a lack of trust in the complaint mechanism as a significant barrier. Participants discussed their belief that the system was not functional and that it would be useless to report their complaints. Some worried about the lack of anonymity (Chung et al., 2018; Martin, 2022; Mincey, 2019) or feared not being believed in their experience (Elliott, 2022; Krivoshey et al., 2013; Ullman, 2019). One article underlined the influence of previous public scandals in connection with the complaint mechanism, resulting in citizens becoming disconnected from the process (Aldridge, 2018).

Unsupportive Culture

The final barrier or limitation reported by several references (n = 19, 54%) was the unsupportive culture within organizations. In many cases, participants described a culture of silence, with implicit (e.g., being labeled a “snitch”) and explicit rules (e.g., having to first report to one’s superior), which discouraged the reporting of IV. Some papers also described the normalization of IV in specific contexts, such as in sport (Davis, 2021; Newman, et al., 2022) or in medical settings (Chung et al., 2018; Gupta et al., 2018). This could lead to dismissing IV experiences as acceptable and a part of the organizational culture.

Recommendations from Evaluation of Complaint Mechanisms

We identified 18 recommendations to improve the complaint mechanisms of IV, spanning four broad categories: organizational accountability, awareness and accessibility, adapted process, and ongoing evaluation strategies (see Table 3).

Table 3.

Description of Recommendations.

Category	Recommendation	Number of References^a	Definition
Organizational accountability
	Elaborating clear and precise complaint policies	16	Policies should include definitions of what is considered inappropriate (including examples), the steps of the complaint process, as well as the roles and responsibilities of parties. The complaint process should be easy to understand, and the limitations should be clearly explained. Finally, although some level of standardization is suggested, efforts should be made to adapt the policies to the context and culture of the organization.
	Promoting collaborative efforts between actors	10	There should be a strong collaboration network between actors in terms of prevention, referral, and investigation. Each person should know what services are offered within this network, and communication between organizations should be efficient.
	Changing the culture to increase social acceptance of complaints	9	For complaint mechanisms to be useful, organizations should foster a climate in which denouncing inappropriate behaviors is encouraged. Strategies named include education, positive leadership, acting on complaints when they are made, and valuing members’ voices.
	Establishing public transparency regarding the process and the results	6	Organizations should provide public information about the number of complaints received, the proportion that were investigated, and the outcomes of the investigation. One reference suggested a public registry of offenders.
	Including actors in developing policies and programs	3	Members of the organization, including people who have been victimized, should be included when developing policies and programs. This would allow for a complaint process better suited to their specific context.
Awareness and accessibility
	Providing professional training	13	Actors that may be required to intervene (e.g., campus police, human resource administrator, and health professionals) should receive training on how to handle complaints. They should also be knowledgeable about how to detect wrongdoing and intervene. Training should be offered regularly to provide updates on policies and processes.
	Offering targeted educational workshops	9	People for whom the mechanism is intended (e.g., students, workers, and athletes) should participate in educational workshops to understand what is considered inappropriate behavior, as well as where and how to complain if needed. These workshops should be tailored to the audience (e.g., specific examples or scenarios and presentation by mentors).
	Promoting the complaint mechanism regularly	4	Organizations should regularly remind their members of the complaint mechanism, including when and how it can be accessed. This information should be easy to locate on the organization’s website.
	Fostering informal or peer support	4	Informal support (e.g., friend, colleague, and supervisor) could be helpful for people who are either considering or actively engaged in the complaint mechanism.
	Reducing or abolishing statutes of limitations	1	Time limitations should be minimized for access to the complaint mechanism, and people who have been victimized should be supported when they are ready to proceed.
Adapted process
	Ensuring confidentiality and protection of people using mechanism	7	Strategies should be implemented to protect the people using the mechanism (i.e., the person reporting and the person allegedly victimized) against retaliation. To do so, the confidentiality of the process is essential, which could entail the anonymity of the people involved.
	Implementing user-friendly processes	6	It should be easy to access the mechanism and to file a complaint (i.e., clarity, time invested, scope, and limitations). Given that many mechanisms have a web-based component, special attention should be given to the design of these features in terms of accessibility.
	Providing adequate training to the mechanism’s staff	6	Staff responsible for the complaint mechanism should possess the necessary knowledge and relational abilities to uphold the fairness of the process. Training of the actors involved should promote the use of trauma-informed practices.
	Providing timely response and regular feedback	5	The complaints should be managed in a reasonable amount of time. People involved should receive regular feedback on the reception, investigation, and resolution during this period.
	Offering adequate resources	3	People using the mechanism should be offered ongoing support through resources adapted to their needs. These include counseling services, confidential hotlines, restorative justice, or legal representation. Resources should be offered at low or no cost to ensure accessibility.
	Considering the needs of marginalized populations	3	Organizations should reflect on the needs of different marginalized groups (e.g., cultural backgrounds, gender and sexual diversity, and disability). The mechanism should be adapted to these varying needs, barriers to access, and potential consequences for marginalized groups.
	Considering the situation and rights of people who are reported	3	The mechanism should consider the rights and needs of the accused, including access to counseling regarding their actions.
Ongoing evaluation strategies
	Ensuring continuous monitoring and adjustments	7	The mechanism’s components (i.e., organizational accountability, awareness, accessibility, and process) need to be evaluated in the various stages of development, from implementation to efficiency. This would allow for the continued improvement and adaptation of the mechanism.

There was a total of 35 references.

Organizational Accountability

The review identified five recommendations that targeted the organizational accountability of the various complaint mechanisms. Several studies (n = 16, 46%) discussed the importance for organizations to elaborate clear and precise complaint policies. This represented the most frequently mentioned recommendation. Individuals should be able to readily access and understand the complaint mechanism’s functioning by consulting the related policy. Many references underlined the need for precise definitions of the different forms of IV covered by the mechanisms, including examples relevant to the specific context. Other studies explained that the lack of unified definitions could hinder the complaint process and suggested a certain level of standardization (D’Antuono, 2021; Knowles et al., 2013; McTavis et al., 2017; Sengstock et al., 2013; Ullman, 2019). However, one dissertation mentioned that the policy should reflect the organization’s culture and context (Bartucci, 2012). The authors proposed there should also be a detailed description of the complaint process, including the roles and responsibilities of parties involved, as well as who can report incidents and instructions on how to do so. A few references also discussed the importance of identifying the complaint mechanism’s limitations, such as confidentiality limits (Krivoshey et al., 2013) or jurisdictional boundaries (Cross, 2018b).

Given the complex nature of IV and complaints, multiple organizations are often involved, such as the police or psychosocial resources. In light of this, several studies (n = 10, 29%) recommended that organizations promote collaborative efforts between actors, underscoring that there should be a strong network of actors involved in every step of the complaint process, from identification and referral to investigation and resolution. Knowledge about the existing services and efficient communication were key factors in promoting trust between people (Bartucci, 2012; Donaldson, 2019; Gupta et al., 2018; Oloumi-Johnson, 2016).

A complaint mechanism’s effectiveness partly rests on whether people will feel comfortable using it. On an organizational level, this could require changing the culture to increase social acceptance of complaints. A number of references (n = 9, 26%) mentioned that organizations should foster a culture in which denouncing IV is not only accepted but encouraged. Organizational leaders were deemed essential in normalizing reporting (Bjørkelo et al., 2021; Byon et al., 2020; Kim, 2017; Macaraeg, 2016; Mincey, 2019). It could also be helpful to engage in educational efforts to deconstruct the implicit rules or gender stereotypes that could hinder reporting (Catley et al., 2017; Elliott, 2022; Newman et al., 2022).

Some references (n = 6, 17%) discussed the importance for organizations to establish public transparency regarding the process and the results of the complaint mechanism. A thorough public reporting of organizations should include the number of complaints received, the proportion that were investigated, and the outcomes of these investigations. These reports could promote the recognition of IV as an important issue to tackle (Martin, 2022; Richards, 2019) and increase trust in the complaint mechanism (Cross, 2018b). Although acknowledging its potential controversy, one article suggested that perpetrators of IV toward elders should be included in a public registry (Sengstock et al., 2013).

A few studies mentioned that organizations should include actors in developing policies and programs (n = 3, 9%). Whether it be survivors of campus sexual assault (Ullman, 2019), coaches, players, and sport psychologists (Newman et al., 2022), or emergency department staff (Knowles et al., 2013), it was suggested that involving actors would lead to more adapted policies.

Awareness and Accessibility

We identified five recommendations that focused on improving awareness and accessibility of the complaint mechanism. Several papers (n = 13, 37%) discussed the importance of providing professional training to people who intervened within the complaint mechanism. One article mentioned that it should be considered a vital professional skill at all levels of an organization (Thompson et al., 2021). Some suggested enhanced training for specific actors, such as educators acting as mandatory reporters (Donaldson, 2019; McTavish et al., 2017; Oloumi-Johnson, 2016). Other references recommended a broader approach that included everyone who may encounter a person victim of IV, including university administrators (Krivoshey et al., 2013; Ullman, 2019). Some studies underlined the need for refreshers or more frequent training, which is critical to keep informed about the changes to policies and processes (Donaldson, 2019; Mincey, 2019; Schmeidel et al., 2012; Sengstock et al., 2013).

Several references (n = 9, 26%) also advised offering targeted educational workshops to people for whom the mechanism was intended. These workshops should cover awareness-raising about behaviors that are considered unacceptable. Some papers recommended relying on the bystander training approach, which could increase positive behaviors of individuals witnessing incidents of IV (D’Antuono, 2021; Lopez et al., 2013; Thompson et al., 2021). Articles also suggested that actors should learn about the complaint mechanism, including the process of reporting (Newman et al., 2022; Zeidan et al., 2022) and its limitations (Cross, 2018b). In a study concerning a sport complaint mechanism, the author advised that the workshops be given by retired athletes who would better understand the context (Davis, 2021).

A few references (n = 4, 11%) mentioned that organizations should promote the complaint mechanism regularly. The previously discussed professional training and educational workshops often occur sporadically, which creates long periods where the mechanism might not be addressed. Authors point out the need to regularly communicate information about when and how to report to the mechanism using email reminders, easily accessible information on organizations’ websites, or dedicated prevention staff (D’Antuono, 2021; Licciardi, 2022; Zeidan et al., 2022).

The strategy of fostering informal or peer support was underlined by a few studies (n = 4, 11%). In two instances, the researchers mentioned the importance of teamwork for teachers who were mandated reporters (Bartucci, 2012) or of the sense of community between home healthcare nurses (Byon et al., 2020) to facilitate the complaint process. The other two papers suggested that organizations should encourage their members to reach out to people they trust for support through the complaint process (Russell et al., 2021; Thompson & Catley, 2021).

One dissertation (Ullman, 2019) indicated that reducing or abolishing statutes of limitations was important to improve access to complaint mechanisms. Time limitations concerning the moment survivors can report their experience or the period for which rape kits and other evidence is kept can reduce access to justice (Ullman, 2019).

Adapted Process

Some references (n = 7, 20%) discussed the importance of ensuring the confidentiality and the protection of people using the mechanism. The researchers underlined that people had to feel safe using the complaint mechanism whether the person who experienced IV or a bystander acting as a whistleblower. The focus of this need for confidentiality was protecting individuals involved in the complaint from retaliation (Elliott, 2020; Hermandorfer, 2015; Martin, 2022; Mincey, 2019; Russell et al., 2021). Researchers explained, for example, that although there were anti-retaliation laws in the U.S., these did not protect student-athletes who were not considered workers (Hermandorfer, 2015). Confidentiality was also sometimes mentioned as potentially limiting the collaboration between organizations, given the necessity to protect certain information, which was salient in medical settings (Sengstock et al., 2013).

Implementing user-friendly processes was identified as a recommendation in some references (n = 6, 17%). While we previously mentioned that the complaint mechanism should be easy to access, it is also essential that the mechanism be easy to use. This means that organizations should develop processes based on the needs of people likely to use the mechanism. For example, in two studies conducted in a healthcare setting (Byon et al., 2020; Knowles et al., 2013), the staff explained that the process was too long for them to report a complaint, given their time constraints. Licciardi (2022) explored the influence of website design on reporting sexual violence through American universities’ complaint mechanisms, which was especially relevant given the number of mechanisms that are accessible online. The researcher made many design recommendations, such as including all relevant information on one or two web pages and minimizing legal jargon (Licciardi, 2022).

Some references (n = 6, 17%) recommended providing adequate training to the complaint mechanism’s staff. Researchers highlighted the importance of providing a safe context for people using the mechanism. A few researchers discussed the necessity of using trauma-informed practices, which could be facilitated by a designated advocate who would offer support through the process (Ullman, 2019; Zeidan et al., 2022). Others raised more generally the need for those who managed complaints to be trained in the nature and consequences of IV as well as in managing complaints (Catley et al., 2017; Thompson & Catley, 2021). This might require specialized training, as suggested for police who respond to incidents of domestic violence (Goodman-Delahunty & Crehan, 2016).

Some studies (n = 5, 14%) underlined the need to provide timely responses and regular feedback to people using the mechanism. While managing complaints and ensuing investigations may take time, delays should be kept reasonable. Furthermore, during the process, there should be regular communication with the people involved, informing them of the steps to analyze and investigate the complaint (Oloumi-Johnson, 2016; Russell et al., 2021; Ullman, 2019). One article suggested that people who reported the complaint should be told what sanctions were given when legally possible (Russell et al., 2021).

In line with what was previously mentioned about tailoring the mechanisms to actors’ needs, a few references (n = 3, 9%) named the importance of offering adequate resources. These resources should be flexible regarding hours, prices, location (internal or external to the organization), and timeline (before, during, and after the complaint process) to adapt to each person’s context. Various resources were identified, such as counseling (Ullman, 2019; Zeidan et al., 2022), legal advice, and restorative justice (Ullman, 2019).

A few papers (n = 3, 9%) identified the necessity to consider the needs of marginalized populations. Researchers mentioned workers from diverse racial backgrounds, gender identities, and sexual orientations (Ullman, 2019) as well as those who used assistive technology or were second-language learners (Licciardi, 2022). One dissertation underlined the potential significance of gender representation in the complaint process (Kim, 2017).

A few studies (n = 3, 9%) suggested considering the situation and the rights of people who are reported through the complaint mechanism. These ranged from increasing knowledge about the perpetrator’s experience of interventions (Gamble Blakey et al., 2019), considering the perpetrators’ rights when deciding on sanctions (Macaraeg, 2016), and the need to offer supportive measures for perpetrators that promoted their accountability (D’Antuono, 2021).

Ongoing Evaluation Strategies

Finally, our rapid review identified recommendations related to ongoing evaluation strategies. Some references (n = 7, 20%) underlined the importance of continuous monitoring and adjustments to the complaint mechanism. There remains much to understand about complaint processes, including factors that promote or hinder reporting (Mincey, 2019). Also, there should be evaluations conducted on the efficacy of previous recommendations, such as complaint policies (McTavish et al., 2017), professional training (Donaldson, 2019), or educational workshops (Sivis-Cetinkaya, 2015). The lessons learned through this continuous monitoring should then be used to improve the complaint mechanism.

Discussion

With this rapid review of the literature, we adopt a broad approach to integrating recommendations from evaluations of diverse complaint mechanisms. The results show that different mechanisms in different sectors share similar barriers and limitations, and their evaluation led to several key recommendations that should be considered to improve access and use. The findings are discussed on how they can inform the development and implementation of formal complaint mechanisms regarding IV in sport settings (see Table 4).

Table 4.

Summary of Critical Findings.

Critical Findings

• This study reports on 35 studies conducted inside and outside the sport context that evaluated complaint mechanisms for interpersonal violence (IV).• The studies covered a variety of settings, such as school, medical, government, or work. Most either target all forms of IV (n = 15) or specifically sexual violence (n = 13).• Results showed that there were five main barriers or limitations to complaint mechanisms: ○ Fear of professional or academic consequences ○ Lack of knowledge and understanding of the reporting process ○ Lack of efficiency and practicality of the complaint mechanism ○ Lack of trust in the complaint mechanism ○ Unsupportive culture toward reporting.• Findings also identified 18 recommendations spanning four broad categories: ○ Organizational accountability, including elaborating clear and precise policies and promoting collaborative efforts. ○ Awareness and accessibility, including providing continuous professional training and offering targeted educational workshops. ○ Adapted process, including ensuring confidentiality and protection against retaliation and implementing user-friendly processes. ○ Ongoing evaluation strategies focusing on evaluating, monitoring, and adjusting the mechanism.

Five barriers or limitations are identified through the rapid review, and each is documented in more than half of the references included in our review. This suggests that regardless of their differences (forms of violence, settings, target populations), complaint mechanisms present similar aspects that limit people’s motivation to use them. Sport organizations should address these barriers and limitations to reduce the gap between the number of cases self-reported by athletes in prevalence studies and the number of cases reported to formal complaint mechanisms (Hartill & Lang, 2018; Hartill et al., 2021; Willson et al., 2022). These findings are coherent with recent studies conducted in sport settings. In Norway, Sølvberg et al. (2023) found that most high school students, including elite (71.7%) or recreational athletes (68.6%) and non-athletes (76.8%), did not know if their school had a system to report sexual abuse or violence. This suggests an important lack of knowledge about the existence of complaint mechanisms, let alone how to access them. Lack of trust has also been reported in studies as a reason athletes decided not to report their IV experience (Adhia et al., 2023; Timon et al., 2022). It seems that lack of trust is often related to previous experiences of reporting that led to little or no consequences for the perpetrator (Adhia et al., 2023; Willson et al., 2022). Concerning lack of efficiency, research conducted with student-athletes identified barriers to reporting IV that were on an institutional level, such as the protection of star athletes, and on a team level, such as a lack of privacy about the report (Adhia et al., 2023). Implementing trustworthy formal complaint mechanisms that are independent of sport organizations is necessary to ensure a safe sporting environment for all involved (Tuakli-Wosornu et al., 2023; Willson et al., 2022).

The barriers and limitations identified in this study have also been underlined in relation to formal complaint mechanisms implemented in sport. In a previously mentioned study among current and former national team athletes in Canada mentioned their fear of consequences, their lack of trust, and the unsupportive culture (Willson et al., 2022). These results concern a period anterior to the implementation of the Office of the Sport Integrity Commissioner (OSIC) that has been actively receiving complaints of IV in sport since June 2022 (OSIC, 2022a). However, the complaint mechanism’s recent operation was severely critiqued by sport advocates and athletes for a perceived lack of independence (Standing Committee on the Status of Women, 2023). The OSIC was initially integrated under the Sport Dispute Resolution Centre of Canada, which is the entity responsible for the tribunal addressing disputes and complaints related to sport at a national level (Burke, 2023). The ongoing pressure led the federal government to remove the OSIC out of its initial structure to ensure increased independence of the complaint mechanism. In addition, a national commission will be assigned to investigate the systemic nature of IV in Canadian sport and offer recommendations to support a wide cultural change (Burke, 2023). The situation in Canada shows that developing complaint mechanisms of IV in sport is not an easy and straightforward process, especially in a context where members already have low levels of trust toward the governing bodies. More research is needed across different countries to support the creation of complaint mechanisms of IV that will answer the sport community’s needs and limit the barriers highlighted in this rapid review.

We identify 18 recommendations spanning four broad categories concerning various aspects of the development and implementation of complaint mechanisms of IV. These findings contribute to filling the knowledge and practice gap identified by Tuakli-Wosornu et al. (2023) concerning the disclosure and reporting step of IV in sport. Indeed, the researchers describe reporting as a dynamic journey including five critical steps: readiness, recognition, disclosure and reporting, response, and remedy (Tuakli-Wosornu et al., 2023). Disclosure and reporting represent a crucial yet underutilized step in the process, mainly related to a lack of trust in the system. This step was described as “the weakest link in the safeguarding chain” (Tuakli-Wosornu et al., 2023, p. 12). The results of the present rapid review are coherent with findings from Tuakli-Wosornu and colleagues, highlighting the complexity of IV reporting process in sport. The following recommendations can, therefore, contribute to the knowledge necessary for sport organizations to manage the complaint processes better.

The first category presents recommendations concerning organizational accountability. The independence of the complaint mechanisms is an essential component. Nevertheless, attention must be given to other aspects of the structure to avoid reproducing the previously identified barriers and limitations. An analysis of three cases of sexual violence scandals in American universities concludes that institutional actions legitimized and perpetuated the abuse (Nite & Nauright, 2020). The authors recommend maximum transparency regarding the investigative processes of complaints of sexual abuse in sport. Other studies on IV in sport also voiced the need for transparency and accountability (Kerr, 2022; Kerr et al., 2020; Tuakli-Wosornu et al., 2023; Willson et al., 2022). For example, the OSIC (2022b) publishes quarterly activity reports available on their website with the number of complaints received and decisions made on their receivability. One strategy to enhance the accountability of complaint mechanisms is to include sport participants in developing the related policies and programs. Researchers in sport increasingly recommend including athletes in IV prevention (Mountjoy et al., 2022; Willson et al., 2022). This decision should be made from the beginning of the complaint mechanism development to ensure that the structure respects the needs and realities of those who need it the most. Including actors only later in the development risks creating a sense of tokenism for the survivors (Mountjoy et al., 2022).

The awareness and accessibility category of recommendations is related to the people’s knowledge and confidence in accessing the complaint mechanism. Some people do not use the complaint mechanism because they do not realize they are experiencing IV (Willson et al., 2022). This situation might be even more present in the sport context, given that IV is often normalized (Constandt et al., 2023; Tuakli-Wosornu et al., 2023; Willson, 2019). The use of IV can be perceived as having instrumental effects, such as motivating an athlete’s performance or ensuring interpersonal control (Roberts et al., 2020). As such, sport organizations should provide professional training for their members to better identify and report IV in sport (Gurgis & Kerr, 2021; MacPherson et al., 2022). There should also be tailored educational workshops for those at risk of experiencing IV to enable them to better recognize inappropriate behaviors (Willson et al., 2022). Research is conducted on developing empirically based training to prevent IV in sport (Schäfer-Pels et al., 2023; Verhelle et al., 2022), which offers a promising avenue for action. Given the evolving landscape of complaint mechanisms for IV in sport, new training should include information to clarify the process of reporting. These structures operate under legal frameworks that might be difficult to understand for the sport community. In her report on the National Women’s Soccer League, Yates (2022) wrote regarding the U.S. Center for Safesport “SafeSport’s patchwork of jurisdiction has created significant confusion in the soccer landscape about who is responsible for investigating claims and imposing discipline in misconduct cases.” (pp. 166–167). While suggestions have been made to improve the process, as presented below, progress should also be made concerning the adequate dissemination of information on the functioning of complaint mechanisms of IV in sport.

In the adapted process category, the recommendations concern specific aspects of the mechanism once a person makes a report. Many of the issues identified align with recommendations made by Canadian athletes to create an independent complaint mechanism for IV in sport (Willson, 2019). When asked about recommendations, they talk about the need for a confidential and neutral structure where to report their experiences of IV with skilled professionals who offer support through the process (Willson, 2019). Similarly, sport administrators in another study mention that an independent complaint mechanism is essential because sport organizations are not trained or equipped to adequately deal with reports of IV (Gurgis & Kerr, 2021). These findings are coherent with the recent development and implementation of complaint mechanisms for IV in sport, such as the OSIC in Canada (2022a, 2022b) or Sport Integrity Australia (2023). However, given that none of the mechanisms have been formally evaluated, little information is available on the state of their current processes. Furthermore, public criticisms about the OSIC’s independence, described previously, indicate the need for further reflection to ensure that the mechanism adequately fulfills its objectives.

This knowledge gap is related to the final category of recommendations on the importance of ongoing evaluation strategies to ensure that complaint mechanisms improve with time and through experience. It has been noted that “the absence of ongoing data collection about progress toward goals, the use of data to evaluate whether policies are effective, why or why not, and under which circumstances, is lacking in sport” (Kerr, 2022, p. 123). This conclusion comes after similar concerns were reported by researchers in the past decades (Brackenridge, 2001; Hartill & O’Gorman, 2014), suggesting that such concerns have been recurrent. More specific attention should be devoted to evaluating complaint procedures at different stages, from their development to their efficacy and impact (Chen, 2015; Rossi et al., 2004). The current list of recommendations forms a general basis for expanding as more information is gathered through research and practice.

Implications for Research, Policy, and Practice

This rapid review highlights many important recommendations obtained through research-based evaluations of diverse complaint mechanisms of IV (see Table 5). Future research is needed to gain more knowledge on the reporting process of IV in sport, especially to understand the reluctance of sport participants to report incidents, which information can then serve to improve the complaint mechanisms. Existing complaint mechanisms in sport should undergo a rigorous external evaluation to document their processes, including strengths and areas for improvement. Even the more recent structures should be evaluated using an approach appropriate to their stage of maturity. Researchers and sport participants interested in this subject could draw inspiration from child protective services, which are regularly evaluated, as shown by several systematic reviews (e.g., Cénat et al., 2021; Damman et al., 2020).

Table 5.

Implications for Research, Policy, and Practice.

Implications for Research

• Future research is needed to better understand the reporting process of interpersonal violence (IV) in sport, including barriers and limitations that could explain the reluctance of sport participants to report incidents.• Complaint mechanisms that are currently implemented in the sport context should be rigorously evaluated. Methods and objectives should be adapted to the stage of maturity of each mechanism. Such evaluative studies would allow us to document the processes, including strengths and areas for improvement, information that could then be used to improve the complaint mechanisms.• More research is needed to understand the similarities and differences of reporting processes of IV in sport, given that the majority of the studies included in this review were conducted in the United States and, therefore, might not be generalizable to other cultures.

Implications for Practice and Policy

• Sport organizations should review and share the recommendations identified in this review to be better equipped in developing and implementing complaint mechanisms for IV in sport.• The findings identified could be used as a list of points for reflection for organizations that wish to improve their practices related to IV reporting and complaint management.• Governments should include a mandatory evaluation component when funding complaint mechanisms of IV in sport to ensure a close monitoring of each stage of development and implementation.• The evaluation results should then be publicly available to increase accountability and general trust in the complaint mechanism.

From a practice perspective, the recommendations of this rapid review should be shared widely with the organizations responsible for developing and implementing complaint mechanisms for IV in sport. The findings could be used as a checklist for organizations to reflect on aspects that could improve their processes. Governments should include a mandatory evaluation component when funding complaint mechanisms of IV. Close monitoring of each stage of implementation should be integrated and regularly updated. Finally, evaluation results should be publicly available to increase accountability and trust in the structure (McLaren et al., 2020; Richard, 2019). There has been an important mobilization of actors in the American soccer community to advocate for a reform of the Center for SafeSport (Parlow Cone, 2023). Changes requested by athletes and youth sport organizations include increased transparency about complaints received, better collaboration with national governing bodies, increased clarity in case resolution, and improved sensitivity toward victims’ needs in the appeal process (U.S. Soccer, 2023). The issues identified in these advocacy efforts are clearly aligned with the current study’s recommendations for complaint mechanisms of IV in sport. Researchers and sport community members should pursue their efforts to better understand the reporting processes of IV in sport and support ongoing improvement of the responsible complaint mechanisms.

Limitations

Most of the studies identified in this rapid review were conducted in the United States, which seriously limits our understanding of culturally specific barriers or limitations and recommendations for complaint mechanisms. As such, more research is needed to understand better the similarities and differences of reporting processes of IV, specifically in sport, in various countries. Regarding the nature of the method used, no gray literature was included in this review, which has left out potential pertinent information stemming from investigative or governmental reports. In time, when more research will have been conducted on reporting processes and complaint mechanisms of IV in sport, a systematic or scoping review, including gray literature, should be conducted.

Conclusion

Findings from this rapid review inform current efforts to develop and implement formal and independent complaint mechanisms of IV in sport. This knowledge synthesis is especially relevant given the current state of IV reporting in sport and the growing public interest in this critical issue. Barriers and limitations identified in the review, such as fear of consequences and lack of trust, represent crucial aspects to address by sport participants to improve access to and use of complaint mechanisms. While more research is needed in this area, this rapid review draws recommendations from various research disciplines and types of mechanisms to offer a comprehensive portrait of best practices. This represents a significant contribution to support the growing interest in developing appropriate complaint mechanisms of IV in sport amidst scarce scientific information on this subject. Recommendations concerning organizational accountability, awareness and accessibility, adapted processes, and ongoing evaluation are preliminary targets for research and practice. Ultimately, increasing knowledge of complaint mechanisms will contribute to improving IV prevention in sport.

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-1-tva-10.1177_15248380241253822 – Supplemental material for A Rapid Review on Complaint Mechanisms for Interpersonal Violence: Integrating Research-Based Recommendations from Multiple Sectors to Inform Sport Settings

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-tva-10.1177_15248380241253822 for A Rapid Review on Complaint Mechanisms for Interpersonal Violence: Integrating Research-Based Recommendations from Multiple Sectors to Inform Sport Settings by Stephanie Radziszewski, Sylvie Parent, Elisabeth St-Pierre, Isabelle V. Daignault, Martine Hébert and Karine Baril in Trauma, Violence, & Abuse

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-2-tva-10.1177_15248380241253822 – Supplemental material for A Rapid Review on Complaint Mechanisms for Interpersonal Violence: Integrating Research-Based Recommendations from Multiple Sectors to Inform Sport Settings

Supplemental material, sj-docx-2-tva-10.1177_15248380241253822 for A Rapid Review on Complaint Mechanisms for Interpersonal Violence: Integrating Research-Based Recommendations from Multiple Sectors to Inform Sport Settings by Stephanie Radziszewski, Sylvie Parent, Elisabeth St-Pierre, Isabelle V. Daignault, Martine Hébert and Karine Baril in Trauma, Violence, & Abuse

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-3-tva-10.1177_15248380241253822 – Supplemental material for A Rapid Review on Complaint Mechanisms for Interpersonal Violence: Integrating Research-Based Recommendations from Multiple Sectors to Inform Sport Settings

Supplemental material, sj-docx-3-tva-10.1177_15248380241253822 for A Rapid Review on Complaint Mechanisms for Interpersonal Violence: Integrating Research-Based Recommendations from Multiple Sectors to Inform Sport Settings by Stephanie Radziszewski, Sylvie Parent, Elisabeth St-Pierre, Isabelle V. Daignault, Martine Hébert and Karine Baril in Trauma, Violence, & Abuse

Footnotes

Acknowledgments and credits

The authors would like to thank David Patenaude, librarian, for his help in the literature review process. The authors also wish to thank the Équipe Violence Sexuelle et Santé (ÉVISSA) for a grant received to support this work.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported in part by a grant received from the Équipe Violence Sexuelle et Santé (ÉVISSA, grant no 134435).

ORCID iDs

Stephanie Radziszewski

Isabelle V. Daignault

Martine Hébert

Supplemental Material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

Notes

Author Biographies

Stephanie Radziszewski, PhD, is a postdoctoral researcher in the Research Chair on Safety and Integrity in Sport at Université Laval. She uses an ecosystemic approach to study issues related to power, including violence in sport and health inequalities. She is also interested in qualitative research, program evaluation, and participatory action research.

Sylvie Parent, PhD, is a Full Professor in the Department of Physical Education at Université Laval where she holds the Research Chair on Safety and Integrity in Sport. Her research focuses on interpersonal violence (IV) in sport. More specifically, her current work focuses on prevalence of IV in young sport participants and on the development of prevention initiatives in that context.

Elisabeth St-Pierre, MA, is a PhD student in criminology at the School of Social Work and Criminology at Laval University. Her doctoral thesis focuses on sex crimes perpetrated in various institutional settings. She is a student member of the Research Chair in Safety and Integrity in Sport (SIMS) and the International Centre for Comparative Criminology (CICC).

Isabelle V. Daignault, PhD, is a Professor in the School of Criminology of the University of Montreal. Her research focuses on the influence of victimization experiences on children’s and youth’s development and emphasizes improving interventions through collaborative and multidisciplinary efforts. She is a member of the Research Chair in Safety and Integrity in Sport and of the International Centre for Comparative Criminology.

Martine Hébert, PhD (psychology), holds the Canada Research Chair in Interpersonal Trauma and Resilience. She is Full Professor at the Department of Sexology at Université du Québec à Montréal. Her projects aim to identify protective factors that contribute to reducing the impact of victimization and to promote the implementation of evidence-based interventions and prevention programs to support the optimal development of youth.

Karine Baril, PhD, is an associate professor in the Department of Psychoeducation and Psychology at the University of Quebec in Outaouais (UQO). Her research focuses on the adaptation of young and adult victims of sexual violence and their relatives. She is a researcher in the Sexual Violence and Health team and a member of the Research Chair on Sexual and Gender-Based Violence in Higher Education.

References

Adhia

Ellyson

A. M.

Mustafa

Conrick

K. M.

Kroshus

(2023). Structural and sport-related barriers to formally reporting sexual violence among undergraduate student-athletes. Journal of Family Violence, 1–10.

Alaggia

Collin-Vézina

Lateef

(2019). Facilitators and barriers to child sexual abuse (CSA) disclosures: A research update (2000–2016). Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 20(2), 260–283.

*Aldridge

(2018). “This is not just about history. . .” Addressing the disconnect in historic (non-recent) child abuse investigations. Child Abuse Review, 27, 24–29.

*Bartucci

G. T.

(2012). Building a climate that supports and protects mandated reporters: School principals and their perceived roles and policies and procedures in K-8 schools (Publication No. 3526256) [Doctoral dissertation, Loyola University Chicago]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.

*Bjørkelo

Thorsen

D’Cruz

Mikkelsen

E. G.

(2021). Whistleblowing and bullying at work: The role of leaders. In D’Cruz

Noronha

Keashly

Tye-Williams

(Eds.) Handbooks of workplace bullying, emotional abuse and harassment: Special topics and particular occupations, professions and sectors (pp. 75–108). Springer Nature Singapore.

Bjørnseth

Szabo

(2018). Sexual violence against children in sports and exercise: A systematic literature review. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 27(4), 365–385.

Brackenridge

C. H.

(2001) Spoilsports: Understanding and preventing sexual exploitation in sport. Routledge.

Burke

(2023, December). Federal government launching commission to probe systemic abuse in sport. CBC News. https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ottawa-independent-mechanism-review-abuse-canadian-sport-1.7054257

*Byon

H. D.

Liu

Crandall

Lipscomb

(2020). Understanding reporting of type II workplace violence among home health care nurses. Workplace Health & Safety, 68(9), 415–421.

10.

*Catley

Blackwood

Forsyth

Tappin

Bentley

(2017). Workplace bullying complaints: Lessons for “good HR practice”. Personnel Review, 46, 100–114.

11.

Cénat

J. M.

McIntee

S. E.

Mukunzi

J. N.

Noorishad

P. G.

(2021). Overrepresentation of Black children in the child welfare system: A systematic review to understand and better act. Children and Youth Services Review, 120, 105714.

12.

Chen

H. T.

(2015). Practical program evaluation: Theory-driven evaluation and the integrated evaluation perspective (2nd ed). SAGE.

13.

Child Protection in Sport Unit. (2023). Deal with a concern. https://thecpsu.org.uk/help-advice/deal-with-a-concern/

14.

*Chung

M. P.

Thang

C. K.

Vermillion

Fried

J. M.

Uijtdehaage

(2018). Exploring medical students’ barriers to reporting mistreatment during clerkships: A qualitative study. Medical Education Online, 23(1), 1478170.

15.

Constandt

Vertommen

Cox

Kavanagh

Kumar

B. P.

Pankowiak

Parent

Woessner

(2023). Quid interpersonal violence in the sport integrity literature? A scoping review. Sport in Society, 27(1), 162–180.

16.

Covidence systematic review software, Veritas Health Innovation, Melbourne, Australia. Available at www.covidence.org.

17.

*Cross

(2018a). Expectations vs reality: Responding to online fraud across the fraud justice network. International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice, 55, 1.

18.

*Cross

(2018b). Victims’ motivations for reporting to the “fraud justice network”. Police Practice & Research: An International Journal, 19, 550–564.

19.

Daignault

I. V.

Deslaurier-Varin

Parent

(2023). Profiles of teenage athletes’ exposure to violence in sport: An analysis of their sport practice, athletic behaviours and mental health. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 38(11–12), 7754–7779.

20.

Damman

J. L.

Johnson-Motoyama

Wells

S. J.

Harrington

(2020). Factors associated with the decision to investigate child protective services referrals: A systematic review. Child & Family Social Work, 25(4), 785–804.

21.

*D’Antuono

H. A.

(2021). The chilling climate: Stakeholder perspectives of sexual assault reporting procedures on the college campus (Publication No. 28546744) [Doctoral dissertation, Johnson & Wales University]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.

22.

*Davis

H. M.

(2021). The cost of gold: How generalized whistleblowing policies are failing athletes. Marquette Sports Law Review, 32(1), 305–316.

23.

*Donaldson

L. A.

(2019). K-12 educators’ perceptions of the mandated reporting process for child maltreatment (Publication No. 27547017) [Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University of Pennsylvania]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.

24.

*Elliott

C. D.

(2022). Non reporting of sexual victimization in male prisoners (Publication No. 29254590) [Doctoral dissertation, Walden University]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.

25.

*Gamble Blakey

Smith-Han

Anderson

Collins

Berryman

Wilkinson

T. J

. (2019). Interventions addressing student bullying in the clinical workplace: A narrative review. BMC Medical Education, 19(1), 220.

26.

Garritty

Gartlehner

Nussbaumer-Streit

King

V. J.

Hamel

Kamel

Affengruber

Stevens

(2021). Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group offers evidence-informed guidance to conduct rapid reviews. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 130, 13–22.

27.

*Goodman-Delahunty

Crehan

A. C.

(2016). Enhancing police responses to domestic violence incidents: Reports from client advocates in New South Wales. Violence Against Women, 22(8), 1007–1026.

28.

*Gupta

Akyuz

E. U.

Flint

Baldwin

(2018). Violence and aggression in psychiatric settings: Reporting to the police. BJPsych Advances, 24(3), 146–151.

29.

Gurgis

J. J.

Kerr

G. A.

(2021). Sport administrators’ perspectives on advancing safe sport. Frontiers in Sports and Active Living, 3, 135.

30.

Hall

(2023, January). “Tip of the iceberg”: Why abuse in Canadian sport is worse than it seems. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023/jan/27/abuse-canada-sport-inquiry-hockey-gymnastics-soccer

31.

Hamel

Michaud

Thuku

Skidmore

Stevens

Nussbaumer-Streit

Garritty

(2021). Defining rapid reviews: A systematic scoping review and thematic analysis of definitions and defining characteristics of rapid reviews. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 129, 74–85.

32.

Hartill

Lang

(2018). Reports of child protection and safeguarding concerns in sport and leisure settings: An analysis of English local authority data between 2010 and 2015. Leisure Studies, 37(5), 479–499.

33.

Hartill

O’Gorman

(2014). Evaluation in safeguarding and child protection in sport. In Lang

Hartill

(Eds.), Safeguarding, child protection and abuse in sport: International perspectives in research, policy and practice (pp. 181–191). Routledge.

34.

Hartill

Rulofs

Lang

Vertommen

Allroggen

Cirera

Diketmueller

Kampen

Kohl

Martin

Nanu

Neeten

Sage

Stativa

(2021). CASES: Child abuse in sport: European Statistics – Project Report. Edge Hill University.

35.

*Hermandorfer

W. D.

(2015). Blown coverage: Tackling the law’s failure to protect athlete-whistleblowers. Virginia Sports & Entertainment Law Journal, 14(2), 250–276.

36.

Hong

Q. N.

Pluye

Fàbregues

Bartlett

Boardman

Cargo

Dagenais

Gagnon

M.-P.

Griffiths

Nicolau

O’Cathain

Rousseau

M.-C.

Vedel

(2018). Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT), version 2018. Registration of Copyright (#1148552), Canadian Intellectual Property Office, Industry Canada.

37.

Jeong

Cha

(2019). Healing from childhood sexual abuse: A meta-synthesis of qualitative studies. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 28(4), 383–399.

38.

Johnson

Hanna

Novak

Giardino

A. P.

(2020). U.S. Center for SafeSport: Preventing abuse in sports. Women in Sport and Physical Activity Journal, 28(1), 66–71.

39.

Kerr

(2022). A look at failed sport policies. In Kerr

(Ed.) Gender-based violence in children’s sport (pp. 120–127). Routledge.

40.

Kerr

Kidd

Donnelly

(2020). One step forward, two steps back: The struggle for child protection in Canadian sport. Social Sciences, 9(5), 68.

41.

*Kim

S. Y.

(2017). Public sector whistle-blowing: The roles of structure, representation, and management (Publication No. 10288429) [Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.

42.

*Knowles

Mason

S. M.

Moriarty

(2013). “I’m going to learn how to run quick”: Exploring violence directed towards staff in the Emergency Department. Emergency Medicine Journal, 30(11), 926–931.

43.

*Krivoshey

Adkins

Hayes

Nemeth

Klein

(2013). Sexual assault reporting procedures at Ohio colleges. Journal of American College Health, 61(3), 142–147.

44.

*Licciardi

(2022). “Supportive or corrosive:” Can a university’s Title IX website design impact reporting of sexual violence? A mixed methods design (Publication No. 29260243) [Doctoral dissertation, Middle Tennessee State University]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.

45.

*Lopez

Y. P.

Lavan

Katz

(2013). Whistleblowing in organizations: A logit analysis of litigated cases. Journal of Workplace Rights, 17(3/4), 283–302.

46.

*Macaraeg

(2016). Sexual assault complaint management from the perspectives of ex-military air force leaders (Publication No. 10140159) [Doctoral dissertation, Walden University]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.

47.

MacPherson

Battaglia

Kerr

Wensel

McGee

Milne

Principe

Willson

(2022). Evaluation of publicly accessible child protection in sport education and reporting initiatives. Social Sciences, 11(7), 310.

48.

*Martin

C. M.

(2022). An exploration of fairness, judicial independence and employee protections (Publication No. 29390771) [Doctoral dissertation, Walden University]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.

49.

McLaren

R. H.

Copeland

Tesic

(2020). Final report on independent approaches to administer the Universal code of conduct to prevent and address maltreatment in sport in Canada. McLaren Global Sports Solutions.

50.

*McTavish

J. R.

Kimber

Devries

Colombini

MacGregor

J. C. D.

Wathen

C. N.

Agarwal

MacMillan

H. L.

(2017). Mandated reporters’ experiences with reporting child maltreatment: A meta-synthesis of qualitative studies. BMJ Open, 7(10), e013942.

51.

Mennicke

Bowling

Gromer

Ryan

(2021). Factors associated with and barriers to disclosure of a sexual assault to formal on-campus resources among college students. Violence Against Women, 27(2), 255–273.

52.

*Mincey

C. E.

(2019). Leaders’ perceptions of the sexual misconduct reporting system in the military (Publication No. 13423123) [Doctoral dissertation, Walden University]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.

53.

Mountjoy

Vertommen

Denhollander

Kennedy

Majoor

(2022). Effective engagement of survivors of harassment and abuse in sport in athlete safeguarding initiatives: A review and a conceptual framework. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 56(4), 232–238.

54.

Naushad

Fix

Wagner

Letourneau

Tuakli-Wosornu

(2021). Patterns of athlete abuse in the U.S. Center For Safesport Central Disciplinary Database. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 53(8S), 201–202.

55.

*Newman

J. A.

Warburton

V. E.

Russell

(2022). Whistleblowing of bullying in professional football: To report or not to report? Psychology of Sport & Exercise, 61, 102177.

56.

Nite

Nauright

(2020). Examining institutional work that perpetuates abuse in sport organizations. Sport Management Review, 23(1), 117–118.

57.

Office of the Sport Integrity Commissioner. (2022a). Home. https://sportintegritycommissioner.ca/

58.

Office of the Sport Integrity Commissioner. (2022b). Statistics. https://sportintegritycommissioner.ca/statistics

59.

*Oloumi-Johnson

(2016). The lived experiences of middle school counselors in reporting abuse and neglect to Child Protective Services: A phenomenological study (Publication No. 10307713) [Doctoral dissertation, Sam Houston State University]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.

60.

Pace

Pluye

Bartlett

Macaulay

A. C.

Salsberg

Jagosh

Seller

(2012). Testing the reliability and efficiency of the pilot Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) for systematic mixed studies review. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 49(1), 47–53.

61.

Page

M. J.

McKenzie

J. E.

Bossuyt

P. M.

Boutron

Hoffmann

T. C.

Mulrow

C. D

Shamseer

Tetzlaff

J. M.

Akl

E. A.

Brennan

S. E.

Chou

Glanville

Grimshaw

J. M.

Hróbjartsson

Lalu

M. M.

Loder

E. W.

Mayo-Wilson

McDonale

. . . Moher

(2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71.

62.

Pankowiak

Woessner

M. N.

Parent

Vertommen

Eime

Spaaij

Harvey

Parker

A. G.

(2023). Psychological, physical, and sexual violence against children in Australian community sport: Frequency, perpetrator, and victim characteristics. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 38(3–4), 4338–4365.

63.

Parent

Vaillancourt-Morel

M.-P

. (2020). Magnitude and risk factors for interpersonal violence experienced by Canadian teenagers in the sport context. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 45(6), 528–544.

64.

Parent

Vaillancourt-Morel

M. P.

Gillard

\ (2022). Interpersonal violence (IV) in sport and mental health outcomes in teenagers. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 46(4), 323–337.

65.

Parlow Cone

. (2023, October). SafeSport is supposed to protect athletes. Its shortcomings leave them at risk of sexual abuse. USA Today. https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2023/10/09/protect-athletes-sexual-abuse-congress-reform-safesport/71041650007/

66.

Popay

Roberts

Sowden

Petticrew

Arai

Rodgers

Britten

Roen

Duffy

(2006). Guidance on the conduct of narrative synthesis in systematic reviews. A product from the ESRC Methods Programme (Version 1). https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=ed8b23836338f6fdea0cc55e161b0fc5805f9e27

67.

Rhind

McDermott

Koleva

(2014). A review of safeguarding cases in sport. Child Abuse Review, 24(6), 418–426.

68.

*Richards

T. N.

(2019). No evidence of “weaponized Title IX” here: An empirical assessment of sexual misconduct reporting, case processing, and outcomes. Law and Human Behavior, 43(2), 180–192.

69.

Roberts

Sojo

Grant

(2020). Organisational factors and non-accidental violence in sport: A systematic review. Sport Management Review, 23(1), 8–27.

70.

Rossi

P. H.

Lipsey

M. W.

Freeman

H. E.

(2004). Evaluation: A systematic approach (7th ed). SAGE.

71.

*Russell

H. A.

Fogarty

C. T.

McDaniel

S. H.

Naumburg

E. H.

Nofziger

Rosenberg

Sanders

Fiscella

(2021). “Am I making more of it than I should?”: Reporting and responding to sexual harassment. Family Medicine, 53(6), 408–415.

72.

Schäfer-Pels

Ohlert

Rau

Allroggen

(2023). Short-and long-term effects of an intervention to act against sexual violence in sports. Social Sciences, 12(4), 244.

73.

*Schmeidel

A. N.

Daly

J. M.

Rosenbaum

M. E.

Schmuch

G. A.

Jogerst

G. J.

(2012). Health care professionals’ perspectives on barriers to elder abuse detection and reporting in primary care settings. Journal of Elder Abuse and Neglect, 24(1), 17–36.

74.

*Sengstock

M. C.

Marshall

B. I.

(2013). Adult protective services workers assess the effectiveness of mandatory reporting of elder maltreatment in Michigan. Journal of Applied Social Science, 7(2), 220–232.

75.

*Sivis-Cetinkaya

(2015). Turkish school counselors’ experiences of reporting child sexual abuse: A brief report. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 24(8), 908–921.

76.

Sølvberg

Torstveit

M. K.

Mountjoy

Rosenvinge

J. H.

Pettersen

Sundgot-Borgen

(2023). Sexual harassment and abuse; disclosure and awareness of report-and support resources in Norwegian sport-and non-sport high schools: A prospective exploratory study. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1168423.

77.

Sport and Recreation Complaints and Mediation Service. (2023). Sport and recreation complaints and mediation service. https://www.sportsmediationservice.org.nz/

78.

Sport Integrity Australia. (2023). Report now. https://www.sportintegrity.gov.au/

79.

Standing Committee on the Status of Women. (2023, June). Time to listen to survivors: Taking action towards creating a safe sport environment for all athletes in Canada. Report presented to 44th Parliament, 1st session. https://www.ourcommons.ca/documentviewer/en/44-1/FEWO/report-7/page-5

80.

Stoner

J. E.

Cramer

R. J.

(2019). Sexual violence victimization among college females: A systematic review of rates, barriers, and facilitators of health service utilization on campus. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 20(4), 520–533.

81.

*Thompson

Catley

(2021). Managing workplace bullying complaints: Conceptual influences and the effects of contextual factors. In D’Cruz

Noronha

Keashly

Tye-Williams

(Eds.) Handbooks of workplace bullying, emotional abuse and harassment: Dignity and inclusion at work (pp. 109–145). Springer Nature Singapore.

82.

Timon

C. E.

Dallam

S. J.

Hamilton

M. A.

Liu

Kang

J. S.

Ortiz

A. J.

Gelles

R. J.

(2022). Child sexual abuse of elite athletes: Prevalence, perceptions, and mental health. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 31(6), 672–691.

83.

Tuakli-Wosornu

Y. A.

Kirby

S. L.

Tivas

Rhind

(2023). The journey to reporting child protection violations in sport: Stakeholder perspectives. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 6744.

84.

*Ullman

(2019). Beyond Title IX: Exploring justice for survivors/victims of campus sexual assault (Publication No. 13809931) [Doctoral dissertation, The George Washington University]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.

85.

U.S. Center for SafeSport. (2022). Emotional & physical abuse & misconduct toolkit. Author.

86.

U.S. Soccer. (2023, September). U.S. Soccer provides update on its participant safety efforts. https://www.ussoccer.com/stories/2023/09/us-soccer-provides-update-on-its-participant-safety-efforts

87.

Verhelle

Vertommen

Peters

G. J. Y.

(2022). Preventing sexual violence in sport: Determinants of positive coach-bystander behavior. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 862220.

88.

Vertommen

Kampen

Schipper-van Veldhoven

Uzieblo

Van Den Eede

(2018). Severe interpersonal violence against children in sport: Associated mental health problems and quality of life in adulthood. Child Abuse & Neglect, 76, 459–468.

89.

Vertommen

Schipper-van Veldhoven

Hartill

M. J.

Van Den Eede

(2015). Sexual harassment and abuse in sport: The NOC*NSF helpline. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 50(7), 822–839.

90.

Vertommen

Schipper-van Veldhoven

Wouters

Kampen

J. K.

Brackenridge

C. H.

Rhind

D. J.

Neels

Van Den Eede

(2016). Interpersonal violence against children in sport in the Netherlands and Belgium. Child Abuse & Neglect, 51, 223–236.

91.

Watt

Cameron

Sturm

Lathlean

Babidge

Blamey

Facey

Hailey

Norderhaug

Maddern

(2008). Rapid versus full systematic reviews: Validity in clinical practice? ANZ Journal of Surgery, 78(11), 1037–1040.

92.

Willson

(2019). Exploring the prevalence of maltreatment amongst Canadian national team athletes (Publication No. 27541232) [Master Thesis, University of Toronto]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.

93.

Willson

Kerr

Battaglia

Stirling

(2022). Listening to athletes’ voices: National team athletes’ perspectives on advancing safe sport in Canada. Frontiers in Sports and Active Living, 4, 840221.

94.

Woessner

M. N.

Pankowiak

Kavanagh

Parent

Vertommen

Eime

Spaaij

Harvey

Parker

A. G.

(2023). Telling adults about it: Children’s experience of disclosing interpersonal violence in community sport. Sport in Society, 27(5), 661–680.

95.

Yates

S. Q.

(2022, October). Report of the independent investigation to the U.S. Soccer Federation concerning allegations of abusive behavior and sexual misconduct in women’s professional soccer. King & Spalding. https://www.kslaw.com/attachments/000/009/931/original/King___Spalding_-_Full_Report_to_USSF.pdf?1664809048

96.

*Zeidan

Patel

Dys

Dean

Curt

Lin

M. P.

Samuels-Kalow

(2022). “Why bother?”: Barriers to reporting gender and sexual harassment in emergency medicine. Academic Emergency Medicine, 29(9), 1067–1077.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.08 MB

0.16 MB

0.06 MB