I'm confused why antipsychotics are listed as 1st line for MDD as opposed to SSRI, SNRIs, etc. This looks more like depressive episode in bipolar disorder or MDD with psychotic features.

I can see this. I also wonder about how technology has changed use of space: buildings, offices, labs. While I may not always be found doing research or sharing knowledge with students or interns in my classroom or lab, I spend considerable hours in my virtual lab, LMS, or in my Open Science Framework. Physically while engaged in this work, I'm in a coffee shop, private office, home, university office, lab, etc.

I wonder how the differences look across different types of institutions. (ranking, nonprofit, profit, free-standing professional school, by region, universities with online programs).

From the study: "The practice is most common in organizational psychology (45.4%) and least common in clinical psychology (30.1%)."

Stigma is particularly high for this group, along with the felt shame that pregnant women bear, which serve as barriers to accessing high quality drug addiction support. Because group therapy is one common form of treatment, retention is lower because the group majority is male. Women who do seek out help do not always feel psychologically safe in these treatment settings. Additionally, they may not appropriately address the unique needs of mothers and expecting mothers. I wonder about regional differences, SES, race/ethnicity...

I agree with this for the most part. The issue I have is that it puts the onus and burden on the individual who is on the receiving end of the microaggression to create a teachable moment. So yes... it is very important that companies first be aware of the problem and that those who suffer from microaggressions are supported. This can come in the form of organizational training as well as support of allies within the workplace who are trained on constructive approaches to addressing witnessed microaggression.

I strongly disagree with this claim. That is not the only criteria one can use. This ignores differences in cultural and personal backgrounds and gives the "interpreter" a pass on being lazy in their assessment. Unfortunately, people who act bothered by a co-worker's low tone of voice and perceived timidness contribute to the problem of placing certain groups at a disadvantage in the workplace or in their career growth. Low tone or deference to superiors for many people is out of respect for authority, and should not be interpreted as lack of confidence. One should look to the individual's credentials, thinking, and contributions to the organization as a whole.