COVID-19 perceived stigma among survivors: A cross-sectional study of prevalence and predictors

Stigma in Pediatric Cancer: An Exploratory Study of Osteosarcoma and Retinoblastoma in Guatemala, Jordan, and Zimbabwe

PURPOSE

Stigma is an understudied barrier to health care acceptance in pediatric oncology. We sought to explore the stigma experience, including its impact on cancer treatment decision making, and identify strategies to mitigate stigma for patients with osteosarcoma and retinoblastoma in Guatemala, Jordan, and Zimbabwe.

METHODS

Participants included caregivers, adolescent patients (age 12-19 years), and health care clinicians. A semistructured interview guide based on The Health Stigma and Discrimination Framework (HSDF) was adapted for use at each site. Interviews were conducted in English, Spanish, Arabic, or Shona, audio-recorded, translated, and transcribed. Thematic analysis focused on stigma practices, experiences, outcomes, drivers, mitigators, and interventions.

RESULTS

We conducted 56 interviews (28 caregivers, 19 health care clinicians, nine patients; 20 in Guatemala, 21 in Jordan, 15 in Zimbabwe). Major themes were organized into categories used to adapt the HSDF to global pediatric cancer care. Themes were described similarly across all sites, ages, and diagnoses, with specific cultural nuances noted. Pediatric cancer stigma was depicted as an isolating and emotional experience beginning at diagnosis and including internalized and associative stigma. Stigma affected decision making and contributed to negative outcomes including delayed diagnosis, treatment abandonment, regret, and psychosocial fragility. Overcoming stigma led to positive outcomes including resilience, treatment adherence, pride, and advocacy. Identified stigma drivers and mitigators were linked to potential interventions.

CONCLUSION

Participants describe a shared stigma experience that transcends geography, cultural context, age, and diagnosis. Stigma manifestations have the potential to impact medical decision making and affect long-term psychological outcomes. Stigma assessment tools and interventions aimed at stigma mitigation including educational initiatives and support groups specific to pediatric cancer should be the focus of future research.

Unraveling socioeconomic determinants of health-related behavior, reception of information, and perceptions on disease disclosure at the time of the COVID-19 pandemic: did health insurance curb the disparities in the Philippines?

BACKGROUND

The study uncovers micro and macro socioeconomic disparities in terms of health behavior, disease perception, and reception of information. Furthermore, findings shed light on the possible role of health insurance on access to information, disease perception and the adoption of preventive behaviors in the context of a public health emergency such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

This study employed a cross-sectional design using the Philippine Demographic and Health Survey (DHS). With a total of 29,809 respondents, it evaluated the individual or household and systemwide socioeconomic determinants of four different outcomes: receipt of information, disease perception, uptake of free preventive services, and treatment-seeking behavior. In addition to logistic regression models with the socioeconomic variables as the independent variables, models for the evaluation of the moderating effect of insurance ownership were fitted. Predicted probabilities were reported for the analysis of moderating effects.

RESULTS

Findings show that individual and householdsocioeconomic determinants affected health-behavior and access to or receipt of information pertinent to the COVID-19 pandemic. Both education and wealth affected the receipt of information such that individuals in more advantaged socioeconomic positions were at least 30% more likely to have received information on COVID-19. Wealth was also associated to treatment-seeking behavior. Regional differences were seen across all dependent variables. Moreover, the study provides evidence that ownership of insurance can close education-based gaps in the uptake of free vaccination and COVID-19 testing.

CONCLUSION

It is imperative that targeted efforts be maximized by utilizing existing strategies and mechanisms to reach the marginalized and disadvantaged segments of the population. Health insurance may give off added benefits that increase proficiency in navigating through the healthcare system. Further research may focus on examining pathways by which health insurance or social policies may be used to leverage responses to public health or environmental emergencies.

Systematic Review of Scales for Measuring Infectious Disease-Related Stigma

Infectious disease outbreaks are associated with substantial stigma, which can have negative effects on affected persons and communities and on outbreak control. Thus, measuring stigma in a standardized and validated manner early in an outbreak is critical to disease control. We reviewed existing scales used to assess stigma during outbreaks. Our findings show that many different scales have been developed, but few have been used more than once, have been adequately validated, or have been tested in different disease and geographic contexts. We found that scales were usually developed too slowly to be informative early during an outbreak and were published a median of 2 years after the first case of an outbreak. A rigorously developed, transferable stigma scale is needed to assess and direct responses to stigma during infectious disease outbreaks.

Social stigma during COVID-19: A systematic review

Objectives

Stigmatization was reported throughout the COVID pandemic for COVID-19 patients and close contacts. The aim of this systematic review was to comprehensively examine the prevalence and impact of stigmatization during COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

English articles were searched using online databases that included PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science up to 24 August 2022. A two-step screening and selection process was followed utilizing an inclusion and exclusion criteria and then data was extracted from eligible articles. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses checklist was followed, and the risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

Results

Seventy-six studies were eligible for inclusion. Twenty-two studies reported the prevalence of social stigma due to COVID-19 infection with social isolation being the most commonly reported stigma. There were 20 studies that reported the majority of participants experienced stigma due to COVID-19 infection, which was as high as 100% of participants in two studies. Participants in 16 studies reported blaming from others as the second most common type of stigma, with various other types reported such as psychological pressure, verbal violence, avoidance, and labeling. The most common effect of the stigma was anxiety followed by depression, and then reduction of socialization.

Conclusion

Findings from the present review have identified that COVID-19-related stigma studies have generally focused on its prevalence, type, and outcome. Greater awareness of this topic may assist with improving public education during pandemics such as COVID-19 as well as access to support services for individuals impacted by stigmatization.

Prevalence and predictors of perceived COVID-19 stigma within a population-based sample of adults with COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Growing evidence suggests that individuals with COVID-19 face stigmatization, which is associated with poor health outcomes and behaviors. However, very few population-based studies have examined risk factors for experiencing COVID-19 stigma. This study examined prevalence and predictors of perceived COVID-19 stigma using a population-based probability sample of adults with COVID-19.

METHODS

We included adults with polymerase chain reaction-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 in Michigan between January 1, 2020 and July 31, 2021. Perceived COVID-19 stigma was considered present if a respondent answered affirmatively to any of the following items due to people thinking they might have COVID-19: "you were treated badly," "people acted as if they were scared of you," and "you were threatened or harassed." We conducted modified Poisson regression with robust standard errors to estimate associations between perceived COVID-19 stigma and potential predictors, including sex, age, race and ethnicity, household income, education, employment, smoking status, body mass index, preexisting diagnosed physical or mental comorbidities, and COVID-19 illness severity.

RESULTS

Perceived COVID-19 stigma was commonly reported among our respondents (38.8%, n = 2,759). Compared to those over 65 years, respondents who were 18 - 34 (adjusted prevalence ratio (aPR): 1.41, 95% confidence intervals (CI): 1.12 - 1.77) and 35 - 44 years old (aPR: 1.66, 95% CI: 1.31 - 2.09) reported higher perceived stigma. Female respondents had 1.23 times higher prevalence of perceived COVID-19 stigma (95% CI: 1.10 - 1.37) than male respondents and non-Hispanic Black respondents had 1.22 times higher prevalence of perceived COVID-19 stigma (95% CI: 1.04 - 1.44) than non-Hispanic White respondents. Moreover, respondents with pre-existing diagnosed psychological or psychiatric comorbidities were more likely to report perceived COVID-19 stigma (aPR: 1.29, 95% CI: 1.13 - 1.48) compared to those without diagnosed comorbidities. Respondents with very severe COVID-19 symptoms were also more likely to report perceived COVID-19 stigma (aPR: 1.47, 95% CI: 1.23 - 1.75) than those with asymptomatic or mild symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that populations who are marginalized in United States, such as females, non-Hispanic Black adults, or individuals with chronic conditions, are more likely to report perceived COVID-19 stigma. Continuing to monitor COVID-19 stigma, especially in vulnerable populations, may provide useful insights for anti-stigma campaigns and future pandemics.

Neuropsychiatric Outcomes and Sleep Dysfunction in COVID-19 Patients: Risk Factors and Mechanisms

The ongoing global health crisis due to the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has significantly impacted all aspects of life. While the majority of early research following the coronavirus disease caused by SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) has focused on the physiological effects of the virus, a substantial body of subsequent studies has shown that the psychological burden of the infection is also considerable. Patients, even without mental illness history, were at increased susceptibility to developing mental health and sleep disturbances during or after the COVID-19 infection. Viral neurotropism and inflammatory storm damaging the blood-brain barrier have been proposed as possible mechanisms for mental health manifestations, along with stressful psychological factors and indirect consequences such as thrombosis and hypoxia. The virus has been found to infect peripheral olfactory neurons and exploit axonal migration pathways, exhibiting metabolic changes in astrocytes that are detrimental to fueling neurons and building neurotransmitters. Patients with COVID-19 present dysregulated and overactive immune responses, resulting in impaired neuronal function and viability, adversely affecting sleep and emotion regulation. Additionally, several risk factors have been associated with the neuropsychiatric sequelae of the infection, such as female sex, age, preexisting neuropathologies, severity of initial disease and sociological status. This review aimed to provide an overview of mental health symptoms and sleep disturbances developed during COVID-19 and to analyze the underlying mechanisms and risk factors of psychological distress and sleep dysfunction.

Perceived stigma of COVID-19 patients in Shanghai, China, in the third year of the pandemic: a cross-sectional social impact survey

INTRODUCTION

Social stigma associated with Covid-19 infection has been reported around the world. This paper investigates the level of self-reported perceived stigma among people infected with COVID-19 in Shanghai, China, in the third year of the pandemic to determine changes in perceived stigma and individual level variables associated with perceived stigma.

METHODS

We conducted a self-reported two-part online survey (n = 144 responses) by employing a convenience sampling method of COVID-19 patients in Shanghai. The first part of the survey collects sociodemographic information of the respondents and the second part outlines 24 items of the Social Impact Scale (SIS), which measures individual level factors associated with stigma, namely social rejection, financial insecurity, internalized shame, and social isolation. We ran Wilcoxon signed-ranks test, Kruskal-Wallis test, and linear regression analysis to assess the levels of perceived stigma differences.

RESULTS

The study finds that the overall level of self-reported stigma during the COVID-19 lockdowns in Shanghai in 2022 was at a lower level than that compared to the self-reported perceived stigma study in Wuhan in 2020. In Shanghai, the severity of the disease and hospitalization length had most impact on financial insecurity and feelings of social isolation. These experiences were not gendered. Recovery measures, including economic considerations, need to pay particular attention to those who experienced severe disease.

Difference in the risk of discrimination on psychological distress experienced by early wave infected and late wave infected COVID-19 survivors in Japan

The psychological distress experienced by coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) survivors after recovery from the illness is amplified by discrimination endured because of their infection status. However, the difference in the risk of facing discrimination and risk of experiencing psychological distress in the early and late waves of the COVID-19 pandemic remain unclear. This study aimed to investigate whether the risk of facing discrimination because of infection status was lower in the early or late waves and whether risk of discrimination on psychological distress was more serious in later, rather than earlier waves. We conducted two online surveys to collect data from survivors divided into two groups. The participants with scores of five or more on the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale were identified as having experienced psychological distress. The participants were identified as having experienced discrimination based on infection status if they had endured being blamed, some type of discrimination, or having themselves or their families maligned. The timing of infection was split into infected during early waves of the pandemic for 2021 participants and infected during later waves of the pandemic for 2022 participants. Modified Poisson regression analyses were performed using experiences of discrimination as criteria and timing of infection as predictors. Modified Poisson regression analyses were further performed using the presence of psychological distress as a criteria and experiences of discrimination and timing of infection as the criteria, in addition to interaction effect of these es. The data of 6010 participants who were infected in early waves and 5344 participants who were infected in later waves were analyzed. The risks of being blamed, some forms of discrimination, and participants and their families being maligned were significantly lower in the group who were infected in later waves than those infected in earlier waves. Experiences of discrimination were highly associated with psychological distress in those infected in later waves than those infected in earlier waves, while only being blamed showed a significant association. Risk of discrimination was found to be lower in those infected in later waves, whereas risk of discrimination on psychological distress was shown to be more serious in those infected in later waves. Therefore, we submit that it is more important to support COVID-19 survivors who face discrimination, than it is to attempt to decrease the current discriminatory climate caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Lessons from the stigma of COVID-19 survivors: A Marxist criticism appraisal

Stigma refers to devalued stereotypes that create barriers for stigmatized individuals. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the stigmatization of survivors worsened existing inequalities and triggered mass hysteria. The paper delves into the stigmatization experienced by COVID-19 survivors and the role of Marxist criticism in analyzing this issue. The main findings from the empiricist tradition approach suggest that the perception of COVID-19 stigma is higher among those who are older, belong to ethnic minorities, lack social support, have manual occupations, and possess lower levels of education. The proposed destigmatization pathways include psychological counseling services, social support, and health education. Employing a Marxist perspective can aid in illuminating how economic practices and material conditions influence prevalent ideologies related to stigma. The stigmatization of COVID-19 survivors may be perceived as a consequence of social power inequality, although the current emphasis on individual characteristics as triggers for stigma may neglect the wider systemic forces in operation. Thus, it’s crucial to establish improved social care policies to combat exploitation and oppression due to power imbalances. The ultimate objective of such an examination is to identify effective approaches to tackle and eradicate stigma regarding health-related concerns. An interdisciplinary approach integrating a pluralistic perspective would benefit investigating how social systems and individual attributes contribute to the exacerbation of social inequality and stigmatization.