社区成员对 "严重精神病 "的态度和理解:混合方法研究。

IF 1.8 3区 医学 Q3 PSYCHIATRY Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-15 DOI:10.1037/prj0000598
Lauren Gonzales, Lauren E Kois, Francis Mandracchia, Ashley Dhillon, Alexandra Purcell
{"title":"社区成员对 \"严重精神病 \"的态度和理解:混合方法研究。","authors":"Lauren Gonzales, Lauren E Kois, Francis Mandracchia, Ashley Dhillon, Alexandra Purcell","doi":"10.1037/prj0000598","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>\"Serious mental illness\" (SMI) is a priority population within mental health treatment and policy. However, there is no standard operational definition across research, clinical, and policy contexts. The use of the label has also not been evaluated regarding its association with stigma among the general public. This mixed-method study compared community members' stigma toward \"SMI\" with other psychiatric labels and examined community understanding and perceptions of the SMI label.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Two hundred forty-six participants recruited via Prolific read randomly manipulated vignettes describing an individual diagnosed with depression, schizophrenia, or \"SMI\" and completed measures of stigma and qualitative questions regarding familiarity, understanding, and perceived utility of SMI. Quantitative analyses evaluated stigma across vignettes, and qualitative analyses identified common themes across responses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Stigma was relatively high across vignettes, with more negative views reported toward SMI and schizophrenia compared with depression. Quantitative differences in stigma by vignette were not significant after controlling for participants' age and gender. Qualitative responses were split regarding the perceived utility of the SMI term, with noted concerns including its broadness and potential for stigma. Most participants described functional impairment or disability as characteristic of \"SMI,\" and approximately 70% associated schizophrenia and psychotic disorders with \"SMI\" compared with 45% for depression.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and implications for practice: </strong>Person-level factors were more strongly associated with stigma than psychiatric labels. However, our sample described concerns that the SMI term is vague and may exacerbate stigma. Community education and antistigma efforts should move beyond diagnostic labels in characterizing mental illness to facilitate change in attitudes. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":47875,"journal":{"name":"Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal","volume":" ","pages":"150-156"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Community member attitudes and understanding of \\\"serious mental illness\\\": A mixed-method study.\",\"authors\":\"Lauren Gonzales, Lauren E Kois, Francis Mandracchia, Ashley Dhillon, Alexandra Purcell\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/prj0000598\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>\\\"Serious mental illness\\\" (SMI) is a priority population within mental health treatment and policy. However, there is no standard operational definition across research, clinical, and policy contexts. The use of the label has also not been evaluated regarding its association with stigma among the general public. This mixed-method study compared community members' stigma toward \\\"SMI\\\" with other psychiatric labels and examined community understanding and perceptions of the SMI label.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Two hundred forty-six participants recruited via Prolific read randomly manipulated vignettes describing an individual diagnosed with depression, schizophrenia, or \\\"SMI\\\" and completed measures of stigma and qualitative questions regarding familiarity, understanding, and perceived utility of SMI. Quantitative analyses evaluated stigma across vignettes, and qualitative analyses identified common themes across responses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Stigma was relatively high across vignettes, with more negative views reported toward SMI and schizophrenia compared with depression. Quantitative differences in stigma by vignette were not significant after controlling for participants' age and gender. Qualitative responses were split regarding the perceived utility of the SMI term, with noted concerns including its broadness and potential for stigma. Most participants described functional impairment or disability as characteristic of \\\"SMI,\\\" and approximately 70% associated schizophrenia and psychotic disorders with \\\"SMI\\\" compared with 45% for depression.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and implications for practice: </strong>Person-level factors were more strongly associated with stigma than psychiatric labels. However, our sample described concerns that the SMI term is vague and may exacerbate stigma. Community education and antistigma efforts should move beyond diagnostic labels in characterizing mental illness to facilitate change in attitudes. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47875,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"150-156\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/prj0000598\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/2/15 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/prj0000598","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目标:"严重精神疾病"(SMI)是精神健康治疗和政策中的重点人群。然而,在研究、临床和政策方面都没有标准的操作定义。对于该标签的使用与公众对其的成见之间的关系,也没有进行过评估。这项混合方法研究比较了社区成员对 "SMI "和其他精神病标签的成见,并考察了社区对SMI标签的理解和看法:方法:通过 Prolific 招募的 246 名参与者随机阅读了描述被诊断为抑郁症、精神分裂症或 "SMI "的个人的小故事,并完成了耻辱感测量和有关 SMI 的熟悉度、理解度和感知效用的定性问题。定量分析评估了不同小故事中的成见,定性分析确定了不同回答中的共同主题:结果:各案例的成见程度相对较高,与抑郁症相比,对 SMI 和精神分裂症的负面看法更多。在对参与者的年龄和性别进行控制后,不同小故事中成见的数量差异并不显著。对于 SMI 术语的实用性,参与者的定性回答各不相同,其中值得注意的问题包括其广泛性和造成成见的可能性。大多数参与者将功能障碍或残疾描述为 "SMI "的特征,约 70% 的参与者将精神分裂症和精神病与 "SMI "联系起来,而将抑郁症与 "SMI "联系起来的参与者仅占 45%:与精神疾病标签相比,个人层面的因素与污名化的关系更为密切。然而,我们的抽样调查显示,人们担心 SMI 术语含糊不清,可能会加剧成见。社区教育和反污名化工作在描述精神疾病时应超越诊断标签,以促进态度的转变。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA,保留所有权利)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Community member attitudes and understanding of "serious mental illness": A mixed-method study.

Objective: "Serious mental illness" (SMI) is a priority population within mental health treatment and policy. However, there is no standard operational definition across research, clinical, and policy contexts. The use of the label has also not been evaluated regarding its association with stigma among the general public. This mixed-method study compared community members' stigma toward "SMI" with other psychiatric labels and examined community understanding and perceptions of the SMI label.

Method: Two hundred forty-six participants recruited via Prolific read randomly manipulated vignettes describing an individual diagnosed with depression, schizophrenia, or "SMI" and completed measures of stigma and qualitative questions regarding familiarity, understanding, and perceived utility of SMI. Quantitative analyses evaluated stigma across vignettes, and qualitative analyses identified common themes across responses.

Results: Stigma was relatively high across vignettes, with more negative views reported toward SMI and schizophrenia compared with depression. Quantitative differences in stigma by vignette were not significant after controlling for participants' age and gender. Qualitative responses were split regarding the perceived utility of the SMI term, with noted concerns including its broadness and potential for stigma. Most participants described functional impairment or disability as characteristic of "SMI," and approximately 70% associated schizophrenia and psychotic disorders with "SMI" compared with 45% for depression.

Conclusions and implications for practice: Person-level factors were more strongly associated with stigma than psychiatric labels. However, our sample described concerns that the SMI term is vague and may exacerbate stigma. Community education and antistigma efforts should move beyond diagnostic labels in characterizing mental illness to facilitate change in attitudes. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
5.30%
发文量
40
期刊介绍: The Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal is sponsored by the Center for Psychiatric Rehabilitation, at Boston University"s Sargent College of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences and by the US Psychiatric Rehabilitation Association (USPRA) . The mission of the Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal is to promote the development of new knowledge related to psychiatric rehabilitation and recovery of persons with serious mental illnesses.
期刊最新文献
Harms of a single story: A researcher's personal narrative and plea for change. Consent to voluntary antipsychotic drug treatment-Is it free and informed? A multisite longitudinal evaluation of Canadian clubhouse members: Impact on hospitalizations and community functioning. Community as therapy: The theory of social practice. Confirmatory factor analysis of the 12-item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS-2.0) within the clubhouse model of psychosocial rehabilitation for serious mental illness.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1