Dataset Information

Mediating effects of self-stigma on the relationship between perceived stigma and psychosocial outcomes among psychiatric outpatients: findings from a cross-sectional survey in Singapore.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To examine whether self-stigma mediates the relationship between perceived stigma and quality of life, self-esteem and general functioning among outpatients with depression, schizophrenia, anxiety and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD).

Design

Cross-sectional survey.

Setting

Outpatient clinics at a tertiary psychiatric hospital in Singapore.

Participants

280 outpatients with a primary clinical diagnosis of either schizophrenia, depression, anxiety or OCD.

Methods

Data were collected in relation to self-stigma, perceived stigma, self-esteem, functioning and quality of life. In order to examine the mediating role of self-stigma on the relationship between perceived stigma and psychosocial outcomes, bootstrapping mediation analyses were used.

Results

Mediation analyses revealed that the relationship between perceived stigma and psychosocial outcomes was subject to the effects of self-stigma among the overall sample. Separate mediation analyses were conducted by diagnoses and showed differences in the mediating effects of self-stigma. Among the whole sample and the subsample with OCD, self-stigma mediated the relationship between perceived stigma and all psychosocial outcomes. For those with anxiety, depression and schizophrenia, the mediating effects of self-stigma were present in all relationships except (1) perceived stigma with physical health in the anxiety sample, (2) perceived stigma with social relationships in the depression sample and (3) perceived stigma with physical health in the schizophrenia sample.

Conclusions

The mediating effects of self-stigma on the relationship between perceived stigma and various psychosocial outcomes are evident and differ across diagnoses. Interventions to address and reduce the effects of self-stigma along with targeted treatments and psychoeducation to assist people with mental illness overcome or better manage self-stigma while providing them the skills to counteract public stigma are needed.

SUBMITTER: Picco L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5724097 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe gold standard management of aortic dissection, a life-threatening condition, includes multidisciplinary approaches. Although mental distress following aortic dissection is common, evidence-based psychosocial interventions for aortic dissection survivors are lacking.ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to identify the perceived psychosocial needs of aortic dissection survivors by surveying patients, their relatives, and health professionals to inform the development of such interventions.MethodsThis study used a cross-sectional survey and collected responses from 41 participants (27 patients with aortic dissection, 8 relatives of patients with aortic dissection, and 6 health professionals) on key topics, types of interventions, best timing, anticipated success, and the intended effects and side effects of psychosocial interventions after aortic dissection.ResultsThe principal intervention topics were "changes in everyday life" (28/41, 68%, 95% CI 54.5%-82.9%), "anxiety" (25/41, 61%, 95% CI 46.2%-76.2%), "uncertainty" (24/41, 59%, 95% CI 42.9%-73.2%), "tension/distress" (24/41, 59%, 95% CI 43.9%-73.8%), and "trust in the body" (21/41, 51%, 95% CI 35.9%-67.5%). The most commonly indicated intervention types were "family/relative therapy" (21/41, 51%, 95% CI 35%-65.9%) and "anxiety treatment" (21/41, 51%, 95% CI 35%-67.5%). The most recommended intervention timing was "during inpatient rehabilitation" (26/41, 63%, 95% CI 47.6%-77.5%) followed by "shortly after inpatient rehabilitation" (20/41, 49%, 95% CI 32.4%-65%). More than 95% (39/41) of respondents anticipated a benefit from psychosocial interventions following aortic dissection dissection, expecting a probable improvement in 68.6% (95% CI 61.4%-76.2%) of aortic dissection survivors, a worse outcome for 5% (95% CI 2.9%-7.9%), and that 6% (95% CI 1.8%-10.4%) would have negative side effects due to such interventions.ConclusionsOur findings highlight a substantial need for psychosocial interventions in aortic dissection survivors and indicate that such interventions would be a success. They provide a basis for the development and evaluation of interventions as part of state-of-the-art aortic dissection management.

Project description:Aims: To examine the extent of social stigma toward diabetes among Singapore's multi-ethnic general population and determine whether this differs across socio-demographic sub-groups. Methods: Data for this study came from a nationwide cross-sectional study. A diabetes stigma questionnaire comprising Social Distance Scale and Negative Attitudes and Stereotyping Scale was administered to those respondents who had not been diagnosed with diabetes. Exploratory factor analysis was conducted to determine the dimensionality of the instruments and validated using confirmatory factor analysis. Multiple linear regression analysis was conducted to examine associations between socio-demographic factors and measures of diabetes stigma. Results: In all, 2,895 participants were recruited from the general population giving a response rate of 66.2%. Factor analyses found that a one-factor model resulted in an acceptable fit for both stigma scales, which measured social distance and negative attitudes and stereotyping, respectively. Multiple linear regression analyses identified Indian ethnicity (vs. Chinese), higher personal income (≥SGD2000 vs. < SGD 2000) and having close friends or family members who had been diagnosed with diabetes to be significantly associated with lower social distance scores while those aged 50-64 years and those with secondary and vocational education (vs. degree and above) were significantly associated with higher social distance scores. Those with a personal income of SG$2,000-3,999 and SGD $6,000 and above, and those with close friends or family members diagnosed with diabetes were significantly associated with lower negative attitudes and stereotyping scores. In contrast those aged 35 years and above, those with primary education and below, and those of Malay ethnicity were significantly associated with higher negative attitudes and stereotyping scores. Conclusions: The study found a relatively low level of stigma toward diabetes in the general population of Singapore, although some stigmatizing beliefs emerged. While greater knowledge of diabetes could reduce stigma, anti-stigma messaging should be incorporated into the "War on Diabetes" programme in Singapore.

Project description:BackgroundAccording to the stress inoculation hypothesis, successfully navigating life stressors may improve one's ability to cope with subsequent stressors, thereby increasing psychiatric resilience.AimsAmong individuals with no baseline history of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and/or major depressive disorder (MDD), to determine whether a history of a stressful life event protected participants against the development of PTSD and/or MDD after a natural disaster.MethodAnalyses utilised data from a multiwave, prospective cohort study of adult Chilean primary care attendees (years 2003-2011; n = 1160). At baseline, participants completed the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI), a comprehensive psychiatric diagnostic instrument, and the List of Threatening Experiences, a 12-item questionnaire that measures major stressful life events. During the study (2010), the sixth most powerful earthquake on record struck Chile. One year later (2011), the CIDI was re-administered to assess post-disaster PTSD and/or MDD.ResultsMarginal structural logistic regressions indicated that for every one-unit increase in the number of pre-disaster stressors, the odds of developing post-disaster PTSD or MDD increased (OR = 1.21, 95% CI 1.08-1.37, and OR = 1.16, 95% CI 1.06-1.27 respectively). When categorising pre-disaster stressors, individuals with four or more stressors (compared with no stressors) had higher odds of developing post-disaster PTSD (OR = 2.77, 95% CI 1.52-5.04), and a dose-response relationship between pre-disaster stressors and post-disaster MDD was found.ConclusionsIn contrast to the stress inoculation hypothesis, results indicated that experiencing multiple stressors increased the vulnerability to developing PTSD and/or MDD after a natural disaster. Increased knowledge regarding the individual variations of these disorders is essential to inform targeted mental health interventions after a natural disaster, especially in under-studied populations.

Project description:Background: According to epidemiological data, over 450 million people worldwide suffer from mental disorders, presenting one of the major challenges of modern medicine. In their everyday lives, patients, in addition to fighting the disease itself, often struggle with stigmatization. This phenomenon negatively affects both the diagnostic and therapeutic processes, as well as the patients' everyday functioning. This study aimed to assess stigma attitudes toward psychiatry and psychiatric patients among undergraduate medical students. Methods: This study used a Computer-Assisted Web Interview (CAWI), which included the standardized items from the Mental Illness: Clinicians' Attitudes (MICA-2) scale to evaluate stigma. The study was disseminated via the internet to students from medical universities from 65 countries worldwide. Participation was voluntary and anonymous. The study involved 1,216 students from these 65 countries. Most of the sample were women, and most were medical faculty students and students living in cities with more than 500,000 residents. Taking into consideration Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita and Human Development Index (HDI) variables, it can be seen that there was a prevalence of medical students from highly developed countries. Results: For the whole sample, the mean MICA-2 score was 40.5 points. Women and medical and nursing students showed more positive attitudes toward psychiatric patients. Students from countries with the highest economic development levels also achieved statistically lower MICA-2 scores. Lower score means a more positive attitude. Conclusion: Stigma toward both psychiatry and psychiatric patients is common among undergraduate medical students. Female students and respondents with a history of mental disorders in countries with high HDI and GDP per capita indices show more favorable attitudes than other medical students. There is a need to further our understanding of the problem of stigmatization, both among the general population and among medical personnel, and to implement and maintain appropriate measures to reduce stigma toward psychiatry.