Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33504412›Full record

ReviewEpidemiology and psychiatric sciences2021

Reducing stigma and discrimination associated with COVID-19: early stage pandemic rapid review and practical recommendations.

P C Gronholm, M Nosé, W H van Brakel, J Eaton, B Ebenso, K Fiekert, M Milenova, C Sunkel, C Barbui, G Thornicroft

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
9.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

40 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 72 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Risk Factors for Social Exclusion and Stigma in a Group of Non-Hospitalised Patients with COVID-19.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

10 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

P C GronholmHealth Service and Population Research Department, Centre for Global Mental Health and Centre for Implementation Science, Institute of Psychology, Psychiatry & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4482-6993
M NoséWHO Collaborating Centre for Research and Training in Mental Health and Service Evaluation; Department of Neuroscience, Biomedicine and Movement Sciences; Section of Psychiatry, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
W H van BrakelNLR International, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
J EatonCBM Global, and Centre for Global Mental Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2697-4965
B EbensoLeeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
K FiekertKNCV Tuberculosis Foundation, The Hague, Netherlands.
M MilenovaHealth Service and Population Research Department, Centre for Global Mental Health and Centre for Implementation Science, Institute of Psychology, Psychiatry & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
C SunkelGlobal Mental Health Peer Network, Johannesburg, Gauteng, South Africa.
C BarbuiWHO Collaborating Centre for Research and Training in Mental Health and Service Evaluation; Department of Neuroscience, Biomedicine and Movement Sciences; Section of Psychiatry, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1073-9282
G ThornicroftHealth Service and Population Research Department, Centre for Global Mental Health and Centre for Implementation Science, Institute of Psychology, Psychiatry & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
King's College London · GBUniversity of Verona · ITLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBNetherlands Leprosy Relief · NLTuBerculosis Vaccine Initiative · NLUniversity of Leeds · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/R023697/1Medical Research Council MR/S001255/1World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsTo develop recommendations for strategies and interventions to reduce stigma and discrimination related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), through reviewing and synthesising evidence in relation to COVID-19 and other disease outbreaks and infectious/stigmatised conditions from systematic reviews and primary studies and recommendations from additional materials.

methodsRapid review, drawing on the World Health Organization's (WHO) methodology for developing interim guidelines during health emergencies. PubMed/MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central and Campbell Collaboration searched up to mid-April 2020. Searches were supplemented by reference-searching and expert recommendations. Searches were designed to identify: (1) systematic reviews (<10 years), or (2) primary intervention studies (no date limit) reporting evidence on anti-stigma interventions (in relation to COVID-19 or other infectious/stigmatised conditions) or (3) additional relevant materials. Data were extracted on population, intervention, outcome and results. These data were compiled into evidence summary tables and narrative overviews. Recommendations on strategies for COVID-19 stigma-reduction were developed using the WHO 'Evidence to Decision' framework approach. The review protocol was registered with PROSPERO (registration ID: CRD42020177677).

resultsThe searches identified a total of 4150 potentially relevant records, from which 12 systematic reviews and 29 additional articles were included. Overarching considerations and specific recommendations focus on: (1) language/words used in relation to COVID-19 and affected people; (2) media/journalistic practices; (3) public health interventions; (4) targeted public health interventions for key groups and (5) involving communities and key stakeholders.

conclusionsThese recommendations represent the first consolidated evidence-based guidance on stigma and discrimination reduction in relation to COVID-19. Mitigating the impact of stigma is critical in reducing distress and negative experiences, and strengthening communities' resolve to work together during exceptional circumstances. Ultimately, reducing stigma helps addressing structural inequalities that drive marginalisation and exacerbate both health risks and the impact of stigma. Administrations and decision makers are urged to consider integrating these recommendations into the ongoing COVID-19 response.

Indexed as

Discrimination, PsychologicalSocial DiscriminationSocial StigmaCOVID-19Disease OutbreaksHumansPandemicsPublic HealthSARS-CoV-2Coronavirusemergency responsehealth inequalitiespublic health

Identifiers

PMID33504412
PMCPMC7884669
OpenAlexW3123405497

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.