The comparison of internalized stigmatization levels of patients with different mental disorders

Self-stigma and bipolar disorder: A systematic review and best-evidence synthesis

BACKGROUND

Bipolar disorder is a severe and chronic mental illness characterized by recurrent major depressive episodes and mania or hypomania. In addition to the burden of the disease and its consequences, self-stigma can impact people with bipolar disorder. This review investigates the current state of research in self-stigma in bipolar disorder.

METHODS

An electronic search was carried out until February 2022. Three academic databases were systematically searched, and best-evidence synthesis was made.

RESULTS

Sixty-six articles were related to self-stigma in bipolar disorder. Seven key themes were extracted from these studies: 1/ Comparison of self-stigma in bipolar disorder and other mental illnesses, 2/ Sociocultural context and self-stigma, 3/ Correlates and predictors of self-stigma, 4/ Consequences of self-stigma, 5/ Treatments and self-stigma, 6/ Management of self-stigma, and 7/ Self-stigma and recovery in bipolar disorder.

LIMITATIONS

Firstly, a meta-analysis could not be performed due to the heterogeneity of the studies. Secondly, limiting the search to self-stigma has excluded other forms of stigma that also have an impact. Thirdly, the under-reporting of negative or nonsignificant results due to publication bias and unpublished studies might have limited the accuracy of this reviews' synthesis.

CONCLUSION

Research on self-stigma in persons with bipolar disorder has been the focused on different aspects, and interventions to reduce self-stigmatization have been developed, but evidence of their effectiveness is still sparse. Clinicians need to be attentive to self-stigma, its assessment, and its empowerment in their daily clinical practice. Future work is required to establish valid strategies to fight self-stigma.

Self-stigma in schizophrenia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 37 studies from 25 high- and low-to-middle income countries

In schizophrenia, it is currently thought that stigma experience is increased by psychotic and depressive symptomatology, exposure to stigma at the workplace, and that self-stigma levels vary across countries without knowing the factors explaining these variations. The aim of the present meta-analysis was to synthetize the data of observational studies comprehensively exploring multiple self-stigma dimensions and associated factors. A systematic literature search without language or time restrictions was conducted in Medline, Google Scholar, and Web of Science for studies, last 09/2021. Eligible studies that included ≥80% of patients diagnosed with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders and used a validated scale measuring self-stigma dimensions were meta-analysed using random-effects models, followed by subgroup and meta-regression analyses. Study registration: PROSPERO CRD42020185030. Overall, 37 studies (n = 7717) from 25 countries (5 continents) published between 2007 and 2020 were included, with 20 studies conducted in high-income countries. These studies used two scales with total scores ranging 1-4. The mean estimate of perceived stigma was 2.76 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 2.60-2.94], experienced stigma 2.29 [95% CI = 2.18, 2.41], alienation 2.40 [95% CI = 2.29, 2.52], stereotype endorsement 2.14 [95% CI = 2.03, 2.27], social withdrawal 2.28 [95% CI = 2.17, 2.39] and stigma resistance 2.53 [95% CI = 2.43, 2.63]). Self-stigma levels did not reduce over time. Living outside urban areas, low-income, singleness, unemployment, high antipsychotic dose and low functioning were associated with different stigma dimensions. Some stigma dimensions were lower in studies carried out in Europe compared to other regions. Most studies published since 2007 report that self-stigma is a particular concern for a specific subgroup of patients. This subgroup is characterized by unemployment, high antipsychotic dose and low functioning. We identified important other missing factors that should be explored to improve the effectiveness of public policies and personalized interventions to reduce self-stigma. Importantly, classical illness severity indices (psychotic severity, age at illness onset, illness duration) and sociodemographic variables (age, sex and education) were not associated with self-stigma, moderating previous findings.

Prevalence, risk, and protective factors of self-stigma for people living with depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

People living with depression are subjected to widespread stigmatization worldwide. Self-stigma may negatively affect patients' treatment, recovery, and psychological well-being. This review aims to summarize and synthesize the evidence on the prevalence, risk, and protective factors of depression self-stigma.

METHODS

Four online databases, PubMed, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Embase, were searched to identify eligible studies. Fifty-six studies involving a total of 11,549 samples were included in the final analysis. Four reviewers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias in eligible studies. Pearson's r was chosen as the effect size metric of risk and protective factors.

RESULTS

The results showed that the global prevalence of depression self-stigma was 29 %. Levels of self-stigma varied across regions, but this difference was not significant. Two demographic factors were identified: ethnicity (r = 0.10, p < 0.05) and having a partner/married (r = -0.22, p < 0.001). Five risk factors were identified: depression severity (r = 0.33, p < 0.01), public stigma (r = 0.44, p < 0.001), treatment stigma (r = 0.46, p < 0.001), perceived stigma (r = 0.37, p < 0.001), and enacted stigma (r = 0.71, p < 0.001). Five protective factors were identified: quality of life (r = -0.38, p < 0.001), social relationship (r = -0.26, p < 0.05), self-esteem (r = -0.46, p < 0.001), extroversion (r = -0.32, p < 0.001), and social functioning (r = -0.49, p < 0.001).

LIMITATIONS

Heterogeneity was observed in some of the results. Causality cannot be inferred due to the predominance of cross-sectional designs among the included literature.

CONCLUSIONS

Risk and protective factors of depression self-stigma exist across many dimensions. Future research should examine the inner mechanisms and effectiveness of interventions to reduce stigma.

Self-stigma in Serious Mental Illness: A Systematic Review of Frequency, Correlates, and Consequences

Self-stigma is associated with poor clinical and functional outcomes in Serious Mental Illness (SMI). There has been no review of self-stigma frequency and correlates in different cultural and geographic areas and SMI. The objectives of the present study were: (1) to review the frequency, correlates, and consequences of self-stigma in individuals with SMI; (2) to compare self-stigma in different geographical areas and to review its potential association with cultural factors; (3) to evaluate the strengths and limitations of the current body of evidence to guide future research. A systematic electronic database search (PubMed, Web of Science, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Ovid SP Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature [CINAHL]) following PRISMA guidelines, was conducted on the frequency, correlates, and consequences of self-stigma in SMI. Out of 272 articles, 80 (29.4%) reported on the frequency of self-stigma (n = 25 458), 241 (88.6%) on cross-sectional correlates of self-stigma and 41 (15.0%) on the longitudinal correlates and consequences of self-stigma. On average, 31.3% of SMI patients reported high self-stigma. The highest frequency was in South-East Asia (39.7%) and the Middle East (39%). Sociodemographic and illness-related predictors yielded mixed results. Perceived and experienced stigma-including from mental health providers-predicted self-stigma, which supports the need to develop anti-stigma campaigns and recovery-oriented practices. Increased transition to psychosis and poor clinical and functional outcomes are both associated with self-stigma. Psychiatric rehabilitation and recovery-oriented early interventions could reduce self-stigma and should be better integrated into public policy.