Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25937022›Full record

ArticleEpidemiology and psychiatric sciences2015

Stigma and discrimination related to mental illness in low- and middle-income countries.

M Semrau, S Evans-Lacko, M Koschorke, L Ashenafi, G Thornicroft

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 93 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
93citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

93 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

33 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

M SemrauCentre for Global Mental Health,Institute of Psychiatry,Psychology and Neuroscience,Kings College London,De Crespigny Park,London SE5 8AF,UK.
S Evans-LackoCentre for Global Mental Health,Institute of Psychiatry,Psychology and Neuroscience,Kings College London,De Crespigny Park,London SE5 8AF,UK.
M KoschorkeCentre for Global Mental Health,Institute of Psychiatry,Psychology and Neuroscience,Kings College London,De Crespigny Park,London SE5 8AF,UK.
L AshenafiCentre for Global Mental Health,Institute of Psychiatry,Psychology and Neuroscience,Kings College London,De Crespigny Park,London SE5 8AF,UK.
G ThornicroftCentre for Global Mental Health,Institute of Psychiatry,Psychology and Neuroscience,Kings College London,De Crespigny Park,London SE5 8AF,UK.

Funding

Wellcome Trust 100714
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsThis paper aims to provide an overview of evidence from low- and middle-income countries (LAMICs) worldwide to address: the nature of stigma and discrimination, relevant context-specific factors, global patterns of these phenomena and their measurement and quantitative and qualitative evidence of interventions intended to reduce their occurrence and impact. The background to this study is that the large majority of studies concerned with identifying effective interventions to reduce stigma and discrimination originate in high-income countries (HICs). This paper therefore presents such evidence from, and relevant to, LAMICs.

methodsConceptual overview of the relevant peer-reviewed and grey literature on stigma and discrimination related to mental illness in LAMICs are available in English, Spanish, French and Russian.

resultsFew intervention studies were identified related to stigma re-education in LAMICs. None of these addressed behaviour change/discrimination, and there were no long-term follow-up studies. There is therefore insufficient evidence at present to know which overall types of intervention may be effective and feasible and in LAMICs, how best to target key groups such as healthcare staff, and how far they may need to be locally customised to be acceptable for large-scale use in these settings. In particular, forms of social contacts, which have been shown to be the most effective intervention to reduce stigma among adults in HICs, have not yet been assessed sufficiently to know whether these methods are also effective in LAMICs.

conclusionGenerating information about effective interventions to reduce stigma and discrimination in LAMICs is now an important mental health priority worldwide.

Indexed as

Discriminationevidence-based psychiatryhealth service researchmental illness stigma

Identifiers

PMID25937022
PMCPMC8367357

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.