Structures and Interventions to Address Trainee Mistreatment in Graduate Medical Education: A Scoping Review

Mistreatment of trainees in graduate medical education (GME) persists despite Accreditation College of Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) standards. Mistreatment disproportionately affects minoritized trainees and undermines their well-being and abilities to provide empathic patient care. The authors conducted a scoping review to identify existing structures-education/trainings and programs/policies-to mitigate harm from and address perpetrators of mistreatment, and to map gaps to guide practice and research. They searched PubMed and Embase for US-based, English-language studies (January 2015-July 2025). References were screened independently and in duplicate. Included studies described educational/training interventions or programs/policies, or proposed a structural approach focused on addressing mistreatment of trainees. Of 856 records, 71 studies (41 articles, 30 abstracts) were included: 56 education/trainings and 15 programs/policies. Trainings reached 3909 learners, were predominantly single-session, and commonly used case-based discussion, role-play, and simulation. Assessments relied largely on immediate self-report of knowledge, skills, or attitudes; few used objective measures or longitudinal follow-up. Programs and policies encompassed real-time reporting tools, communication campaigns, co-created protocols, and task forces all focused on addressing mistreatment after the fact. Outcomes included increased reporting volume of mistreatment, characterization of perpetrators, and identification of concentrated areas of mistreatment within the health system, trainee perceptions, and feedback loops. Mapping of the literature revealed many education/training interventions and fewer programs/policies. A significant gap remains because too strong a focus exists on teaching trainees-the targets of mistreatment-to manage the mistreatment after the fact, rather than implementing trainings and programs to proactively prevent learner mistreatment. The authors suggest opportunities including perpetrator-focused, non-punitive trainings, longitudinal skills reinforcement in the clinical learning environment, transparent measurement, and a continuous quality improvement approach to both preventing and recovering from mistreatment. Addressing mistreatment will require institutional policies and comprehensive, equity-informed structures with objective assessment, shifting focus from resilience after harm to prevention at its source.