Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30770756›Full record

SynthesisBMC medicine2019

A systematic review of multi-level stigma interventions: state of the science and future directions.

Deepa Rao, Ahmed Elshafei, Minh Nguyen, Mark L Hatzenbuehler, Sarah Frey, Vivian F Go

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 182 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
182citing papers in PubMed, 8 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

182 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

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

122 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

6 authors.

Deepa RaoDepartment of Global Health, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington, Campus Mailbox 357965, Harris Hydraulics Building, 1705 NE Pacific Street, Seattle, WA, 98195-7175, USA. deeparao@uw.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-4076-0170
Ahmed ElshafeiDepartment of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Minh NguyenDepartment of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Mark L HatzenbuehlerDepartment of Sociomedical Sciences, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Sarah FreyDepartment of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Vivian F GoDepartment of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.

Funding

University of Washington/Fred Hutch Center for AIDS ResearchP30AI027757 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI EDWIN ROBERTO ORELLANA · 1988 to 2026
$104.9M
Southern African Research Consortium for Mental health INTegration (S-MhINT)-Research and capacity building consortium to strengthen mental health integration in South Africa, Mozambique and Tanzania.U19MH113191 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF KWAZULU-NATAL · PI PETERSEN, INGE · 2017 to 2022
$3.1M
NIAID NIH HHS P30 AI027757NIMH NIH HHS U19 MH113191
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundResearchers have long recognized that stigma is a global, multi-level phenomenon requiring intervention approaches that target multiple levels including individual, interpersonal, community, and structural levels. While existing interventions have produced modest reductions in stigma, their full reach and impact remain limited by a nearly exclusive focus targeting only one level of analysis.

methodsWe conducted the first systematic review of original research on multi-level stigma-reduction interventions. We used the following eligibility criteria for inclusion: (1) peer-reviewed, (2) contained original research, (3) published prior to initiation of search on November 30, 2017, (4) evaluated interventions that operated on more than one level, and (5) examined stigma as an outcome. We stratified and analyzed articles by several domains, including whether the research was conducted in a low-, middle-, or high-income country.

resultsTwenty-four articles met the inclusion criteria. The articles included a range of countries (low, middle, and high income), stigmatized conditions/populations (e.g., HIV, mental health, leprosy), intervention targets (e.g., people living with a stigmatized condition, health care workers, family, and community members), and stigma reduction strategies (e.g., contact, social marketing, counseling, faith, problem solving), with most using education-based approaches. A total of 12 (50%) articles examined community-level interventions alongside interpersonal and/or intrapersonal levels, but only 1 (4%) combined a structural-level intervention with another level. Of the 24 studies, only 6 (25%) were randomized controlled trials. While most studies (17 of 24) reported statistically significant declines in at least one measure of stigma, fewer than half reported measures of practical significance (i.e., effect size); those that were reported varied widely in magnitude and were typically in the small-to-moderate range.

conclusionsWhile there has been progress over the past decade in the development and evaluation of multi-level stigma interventions, much work remains to strengthen and expand this approach. We highlight several opportunities for new research and program development.

Indexed as

Social StigmaHumansLow- and middle-income countriesMulti-level interventionsStigma

Identifiers

PMID30770756
PMCPMC6377735

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.