26
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Should we be concerned about stigma and discrimination in people at risk for psychosis? A systematic review

      , ,
      Psychological Medicine
      Cambridge University Press (CUP)

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Previous studies have provided initial evidence that people at risk for psychosis (PR) suffer from stigma and discrimination related to their condition. However, no study has systematically reviewed stigma and discrimination associated with being at PR and the potential underlying mechanisms.

          Methods

          This work aimed to systematically review all studies addressing stigma and discrimination in PR people in order to assess: (1) the occurrence of this phenomenon and its different components (public, internalized, perceived, and labeling-related), (2) whether stigma affects outcomes of the PR state, and (3) whether other factors modulate stigma among PR individuals.

          Results

          The reviewed studies ( n = 38) widely differ in their design, methodological quality, and populations under investigation, thus limiting direct comparison of findings. However, converging evidence suggests that the general public endorses stigmatizing attitudes towards PR individuals, and that this is more frequent in people with a low educational level or with no direct experience of the PR state. PR individuals experience more internalized stigma and perceive more discrimination than healthy subjects or patients with non-psychotic disorders. Further, PR labeling is equally associated with both positive (e.g. validation and relief) and negative effects (e.g. status loss and discrimination). Moreover, stigma increases the likelihood of poor outcome, transition to full-psychosis, disengagement from services, and family stigma among PR individuals. Finally, very limited evidence awaiting replication supports the efficacy of cognitive therapies in mitigating the negative effects of stigma.

          Conclusions

          Evidence confirms previous concerns about stigma and its negative consequences for PR individuals, thus having important public health implications.

          Related collections

          Most cited references58

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

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

          Psychological Medicine, 45(1), 11-27
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            A Modified Labeling Theory Approach to Mental Disorders: An Empirical Assessment

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The psychosis high-risk state: a comprehensive state-of-the-art review.

              During the past 2 decades, a major transition in the clinical characterization of psychotic disorders has occurred. The construct of a clinical high-risk (HR) state for psychosis has evolved to capture the prepsychotic phase, describing people presenting with potentially prodromal symptoms. The importance of this HR state has been increasingly recognized to such an extent that a new syndrome is being considered as a diagnostic category in the DSM-5. To reframe the HR state in a comprehensive state-of-the-art review on the progress that has been made while also recognizing the challenges that remain. Available HR research of the past 20 years from PubMed, books, meetings, abstracts, and international conferences. Critical review of HR studies addressing historical development, inclusion criteria, epidemiologic research, transition criteria, outcomes, clinical and functional characteristics, neurocognition, neuroimaging, predictors of psychosis development, treatment trials, socioeconomic aspects, nosography, and future challenges in the field. Relevant articles retrieved in the literature search were discussed by a large group of leading worldwide experts in the field. The core results are presented after consensus and are summarized in illustrative tables and figures. The relatively new field of HR research in psychosis is exciting. It has the potential to shed light on the development of major psychotic disorders and to alter their course. It also provides a rationale for service provision to those in need of help who could not previously access it and the possibility of changing trajectories for those with vulnerability to psychotic illnesses.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                Psychological Medicine
                Psychol. Med.
                Cambridge University Press (CUP)
                0033-2917
                1469-8978
                April 2020
                February 17 2020
                April 2020
                : 50
                : 5
                : 705-726
                Article
                10.1017/S0033291720000148
                32063250
                bf57cd22-43aa-4ac2-a9e0-3aa5164ae109
                © 2020

                http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article