ArticleBMJ public health2024
Psychosocial health stigma related to COVID-19 disease among COVID-19 patients in Jordan: a comparative study.
Article in BMJ public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparative study of stigma and discrimination among vaccinated and non-vaccinated COVID-19 survivors in Bangladesh.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
abstractObjective: Beyond its effects on physical health, COVID-19 psychosocial stigma has emerged as a result of this global crisis, making people feel ashamed, alone and discriminated against. This comparative study aims to assess the psychosocial health stigma of COVID-19, and to evaluate the perceived stigma according to the sociodemographic variables during the pandemic in Jordan. Method: A study in Jordan compared stigma between 112 COVID-19 patients (52 males and 60 females) and 118 healthy controls (56 males and 62 females), with participants ranging from 18 to over 60 years old in both groups. Results: According to the data, 27% of COVID-19 patients had high-level stigma, with total stigma scores ranging from 46 to 111 and a mean of 80.23 (SD=12.79). Quartile results showed 50% scored 80, 25% over 88 and 75% over 78, indicating moderate stigma within a 0-160 range. On the other hand, the total scores of stigma among the healthy controls ranged from 40 to 112, with a mean of 78.55 (SD=12.41). 30.3% report high levels of stigma. Quartile results showed 50% scored 78, 25% over 85 and 75% over 71, indicating moderate stigma. No significant stigma score difference was found between patients and controls (t=1.09, p=0.28). No significant correlation with demographics, except among medical workers (t=-3.32, p=0.001). Conclusion: The study revealed negligible differences in stigma between the two groups, but greater stigma among medical field workers highlighting the need for integrated community and policy support to fight stigma.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.