What is the impact of mental health-related stigma on help-seeking? A systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies

Publisher Copyright: Copyright © 2014 Cambridge University Press.Background. Individuals often avoid or delay seeking professional help for mental health problems. Stigma may be a key deterrent to help-seeking but this has not been reviewed systematically. Our systematic review addressed the overarching question: What is the impact of mental health-related stigma on help-seeking for mental health problems? Subquestions were: (a) What is the size and direction of any association between stigma and help-seeking? (b) To what extent is stigma identified as a barrier to help-seeking? (c) What processes underlie the relationship between stigma and help-seeking? (d) Are there population groups for which stigma disproportionately deters help-seeking? Method Five electronic databases were searched from 1980 to 2011 and references of reviews checked. A meta-synthesis of quantitative and qualitative studies, comprising three parallel narrative syntheses and subgroup analyses, was conducted. Results. The review identified 144 studies with 90 189 participants meeting inclusion criteria. The median association between stigma and help-seeking was d = - 0.27, with internalized and treatment stigma being most often associated with reduced help-seeking. Stigma was the fourth highest ranked barrier to help-seeking, with disclosure concerns the most commonly reported stigma barrier. A detailed conceptual model was derived that describes the processes contributing to, and counteracting, the deterrent effect of stigma on help-seeking. Ethnic minorities, youth, men and those in military and health professions were disproportionately deterred by stigma. Conclusions. Stigma has a small- to moderate-sized negative effect on help-seeking. Review findings can be used to help inform the design of interventions to increase help-seeking.Peer reviewe

Evidence for effective interventions to reduce mental Healthrelated stigma and discrimination in the medium and long term : Systematic review

Publisher Copyright: Copyright © 2015 The Royal College of Psychiatrists, unless otherwise stated.Background Most research on interventions to counter stigma and discrimination has focused on shortterm outcomes and has been conducted in highincome settings. Aims To synthesise what is known globally about effective interventions to reduce mental illnessbased stigma and discrimination, in relation first to effectiveness in the medium and long term (minimum 4 weeks), and second to interventions in lowand middleincome countries (LMICs). Method We searched six databases from 1980 to 2013 and conducted a multilanguage Google search for quantitative studies addressing the research questions. Effect sizes were calculated from eligible studies where possible, and narrative syntheses conducted. Subgroup analysis compared interventions with and without social contact. Results Eighty studies (n = 422 653) were included in the review. For studies with medium or longterm followup (72, of which 21 had calculable effect sizes) median standardised mean differences were 0.54 for knowledge and-0.26 for stigmatising attitudes. Those containing social contact (direct or indirect) were not more effective than those without. The 11 LMIC studies were all from middleincome countries. Effect sizes were rarely calculable for behavioural outcomes or in LMIC studies. Conclusions There is modest evidence for the effectiveness of antistigma interventions beyond 4 weeks followup in terms of increasing knowledge and reducing stigmatising attitudes. Evidence does not support the view that social contact is the more effective type of intervention for improving attitudes in the medium to long term. Methodologically strong research is needed on which to base decisions on investment in stigmareducing interventions.Peer reviewe

The Child and Adolescent Psychiatry: Study of Training in Europe (CAP-STATE)

There is great cultural diversity across Europe. This is reflected in the organisation of child and adolescent mental health (CAMH) services and the training of the respective professionals in different countries in Europe. Patients and their parents will want a high quality, knowledgeable, and skillful service from child and adolescent psychiatrists (CAPs) wherever they see them in Europe. A European comparison of training programs allows all stakeholders in different European countries to assess the diversity and to initiate discussions as to the introduction of improvements within national training programs. Major issues to be addressed in comparing child and adolescent psychiatric training programs across Europe include: (1) formal organisation and content of training programs and the relationship to adult psychiatry and paediatrics; (2) flexibility of training, given different trainee interests and that many trainees will have young families; (3) quality of governance of training systems; (4) access to research; and (5) networking. The Child and Adolescent Psychiatry-Study of Training in Europe (CAP-State) is a survey of training for child and adolescent psychiatrists (CAPs) across European countries. It aims to revisit and extend the survey carried out in 2006 by Karabekiroglu and colleagues. The current article is embedded in a special issue of European Child + Adolescent Psychiatry attempting to for the first time address training in CAP at the European and global levels. Structured information was sought from each of 38 European and neighboring countries (subsequently loosely referred to as Europe) and obtained from 31. The information was provided by a senior trainee or recently qualified specialist and their information was checked and supplemented by information from a senior child and adolescent psychiatry trainer. Results showed that there is a very wide range of provision of training in child and adolescent psychiatry in different countries in Europe. There remains very substantial diversity in training across Europe and in the degree to which it is subject to national oversight and governance. Some possible reasons for this variation are discussed and some recommendations made.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

A Review of Minority Stress Related to Employees' Demographics and the Development of an Intersectional Framework for Their Coping Strategies in the Workplace

Every employee embodies manifestations of every demographic that attach to him or her different minority and majority statuses at the same time. As these statuses are often related to organizational hierarchies, employees frequently hold positions of dominance and subordination at the same time. Thus, a given individual's coping strategies (or coping behavior) in terms of minority stress due to organizational processes of hierarchization, marginalization and discrimination, are very often a simultaneous coping in terms of more than one demographic. Research on minority stress mostly focuses on single demographics representing only single facets of workforce diversity. By integrating the demographics of age, disability status, nationality, ethnicity, race, sexual orientation, and religion into one framework, the intersectional model proposed in this article broadens the perspective on minorities and related minority stress in the workplace. It is shown that coping with minority stress because of one demographic must always be interpreted in relation to the other demographics. The manifestation of one demographic can limit or broaden one's coping resources for coping with minority stress because of another dimension. Thus the manifestation of one demographic can determine the coping opportunities and coping behavior one applies to situations because of the minority status of another demographic. This coping behavior can include disclosure decisions about invisible demographics. Therefore organizational interventions aiming to create a supportive workplace environment and equal opportunities for every employee (e.g. diversity management approaches) should include more demographics instead of focusing only on few. (author's abstract

Evidence for effective interventions to reduce mental Healthrelated stigma and discrimination in the medium and long term: Systematic review

Background Most research on interventions to counter stigma and discrimination has focused on shortterm outcomes and has been conducted in highincome settings. Aims To synthesise what is known globally about effective interventions to reduce mental illnessbased stigma and discrimination, in relation first to effectiveness in the medium and long term (minimum 4 weeks), and second to interventions in lowand middleincome countries (LMICs). Method We searched six databases from 1980 to 2013 and conducted a multilanguage Google search for quantitative studies addressing the research questions. Effect sizes were calculated from eligible studies where possible, and narrative syntheses conducted. Subgroup analysis compared interventions with and without social contact. Results Eighty studies (n = 422 653) were included in the review. For studies with medium or longterm followup (72, of which 21 had calculable effect sizes) median standardised mean differences were 0.54 for knowledge and-0.26 for stigmatising attitudes. Those containing social contact (direct or indirect) were not more effective than those without. The 11 LMIC studies were all from middleincome countries. Effect sizes were rarely calculable for behavioural outcomes or in LMIC studies. Conclusions There is modest evidence for the effectiveness of antistigma interventions beyond 4 weeks followup in terms of increasing knowledge and reducing stigmatising attitudes. Evidence does not support the view that social contact is the more effective type of intervention for improving attitudes in the medium to long term. Methodologically strong research is needed on which to base decisions on investment in stigmareducing interventions. Copyright © 2015 The Royal College of Psychiatrists, unless otherwise stated