Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37160437›Full record

SynthesisSocial psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology2023

Does the peer-led Honest, Open, Proud program reduce stigma's impact for everyone? An individual participant data meta-regression analysis.

Thomas Klein, Markus Kösters, Patrick W Corrigan, Winnie W S Mak, Lindsay Sheehan, Colleen S Conley, Nathalie Oexle, Nicolas Rüsch

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

8 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Thomas KleinSection Public Mental Health, Department of Psychiatry II, Ulm University and BKH Günzburg, Parkstraße 11, 89073, Ulm, Germany.
Markus KöstersCenter for Evidence-Based Healthcare, Medical Faculty Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität, Dresden, Germany.
Patrick W CorriganDepartment of Psychology, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, IL, USA.
Winnie W S MakDepartment of Psychology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong Shatin , NT, Hong Kong SAR.
Lindsay SheehanDepartment of Psychology, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, IL, USA.
Colleen S ConleyDepartment of Psychology, Loyola University Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Nathalie OexleSection Public Mental Health, Department of Psychiatry II, Ulm University and BKH Günzburg, Parkstraße 11, 89073, Ulm, Germany.
Nicolas RüschSection Public Mental Health, Department of Psychiatry II, Ulm University and BKH Günzburg, Parkstraße 11, 89073, Ulm, Germany. nicolas.ruesch@uni-ulm.de.
Universität Ulm · DEIllinois Institute of Technology · USChinese University of Hong Kong · HKLoyola University Chicago · USTechnische Universität Dresden · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeMany people with mental illness experience self-stigma and stigma-related stress and struggle with decisions whether to disclose their condition to others. The peer-led Honest, Open, Proud (HOP) group program supports them in their disclosure decisions. In randomized controlled trials, HOP has shown positive effects on self-stigma and stigma stress on average. This study examined individual predictors of HOP outcomes and tested the hypothesis that stigma stress reduction at the end of HOP mediates positive HOP effects at follow-up.

methodsSix RCTs were included with data at baseline, post (after the HOP program) and at 3- or 4-week follow-up. Baseline variables were entered in meta-regression models to predict change in self-stigma, stigma stress, depressive symptoms and quality of life among HOP participants. Mediation models examined change in stigma stress (post) as a mediator of HOP effects on self-stigma, depressive symptoms, and quality of life at follow-up.

resultsMore shame at baseline, and for some outcomes reduced empowerment, predicted reduced HOP effects on stigma stress, self-stigma, depressive symptoms, and quality of life. Younger age was related to greater improvements in stigma stress after the HOP program. Stigma stress reductions at the end of HOP mediated positive effects on self-stigma, depressive symptoms and quality of life at follow-up.

conclusionParticipants who are initially less burdened by shame may benefit more from HOP. Stigma stress reduction could be a key mechanism of change that mediates effects on more distal outcomes. Implications for the further development of HOP are discussed.

Indexed as

Mental DisordersQuality of LifeHumansRegression AnalysisSelf ConceptSocial StigmaComing Out ProudHonest, Open, ProudInternalized stigmaMeta-analysisPeer-led interventionsSelf-stigma

Identifiers

PMID37160437
PMCPMC10562308
OpenAlexW4376121356

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.