Stigma in adults with ADHD: a systematic review of types, experiences, and potential implications for quality of life.

Background: Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a disorder characterized by hyperactive, impulsive, and/or inattentive symptoms. Adults with ADHD often report reduced quality of life (QoL) across social, educational, and occupational functioning. Part of these deficits may be attributed to stigma, which includes stereotypes, prejudices, discrimination, and negative labelling. While stigma's effects on QoL have been extensively documented in other mental health conditions, the specific types and impacts of stigma experienced by adults with ADHD remain underexplored in recent reviews. Aims: To identify and describe the different types of stigmas experienced by adults with ADHD, while exploring how stigma may impact QoL's key domains as defined by WHO (physical domain, psychological domain, level of independence, social relationships, environment, and spirituality/religion/personal beliefs). Methods: A literature search was conducted across APA PsycArticles, Embase, and Ovid MEDLINE(R) for ADHD AND stigma-related keywords. Eligible studies were English, peer-reviewed articles from the past decade involving adults (≥18) and describing or specifying at least one type of stigma. Results: A total of 17 papers met the inclusion criteria. Stigma types included self-stigma and/or internalized stigma, perceived stigma, public stigma, and structural stigma. QoL domains affected included the psychological domain, social relationships, environment, and level of independence. Greater ADHD symptomatology was positively correlated with more internalized stigma, which in turn was linked to functional impairment, worse self-esteem, and poorer QoL. Self-stigma manifested as self-deprecating labels and ADHD devaluation. Perceived stigma hindered treatment seeking, medication compliance, and diagnostic disclosure, although associations with QoL were insignificant. Public stigma was the most investigated and related to negative societal attitudes, notably in academic contexts. Few studies looked at structural stigma; those that did identified structural barriers to care, though none directly assessed QoL outcomes. Conclusion: Stigma remains pervasive, though direct effects on QoL domains are less widely investigated. Future studies should investigate structural stigma in more depth and explore causal relationships between stigma and QoL. Systematic Review Registration: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/Y52HK.