That lesson better applies to a predominantly narcissistic personality type organized at the borderline level. DSM isn't very dimensionally flexible when it comes to PD diagnoses, but even with what we got they're hardly ever applied well so I can't blame 'em.
As far as malignant programs.... Well I'd probably wager that the community programs matching lots of IMGs is the set that contains all the places that are truly malignant, yet that shouldn't be globalized in the least. It's also not very useful, because it's rare people will match at a low-tier program who isn't qualified enough to go to a reputable University-affiliated residency. There's some selection bias there too, although there are problem residents that get into great programs too. A lot of "malignant" designations are about the resident-program fit more than anything. Even at top places, some people will have experiences that will feel like malignancy, and even some of those stories are hard to justify as appropriate on behalf of the program. Still, one bad experience doesn't have to color your residency. It can have a lot of gravity, though. At my program, we had a resident who was discriminated against due to some regular adjustment to resident life and 1 unfortunate mistake, but she graduated and improved and found herself with plenty of allies although never able to completely overcome the unfounded reputation. That can be pretty crushing for people who really want to do well. One other resident was intentionally blowing off duties and did not care about the program's attempts to fix it, eventually taking a child fellowship fast track instead of being canned. He should have been canned at least after PGY-2, but his experience also shows how reputable programs can float along problem residents. These 2 cases are fairly unusual. There are occasionally residents who burn out and quit or transfer than have malignant experiences at good programs. Sometimes that's just a bad cultural or life fit, too.