Enhancing educational and vocational recovery in adolescents and young adults with early psychosis through Supported Employment and Education (SEEearly): study protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Psychotic disorders often develop a chronic course with devastating consequences for individuals, families, and societies. Early intervention programs for people in the first 5 years after the initial psychotic episode (early psychosis) can significantly improve the outcome and are therefore strongly recommended in national and international guidelines. However, most early intervention programs still focus on improving symptoms and relapse prevention, rather than targeting educational and vocational recovery. The aim of the present study is to explore the effects of Supported Employment and Education (SEE) following the Individual Placement and Support (IPS) model in people with early psychosis. METHODS: The SEEearly trial compares treatment as usual (TAU) plus SEE to TAU alone in outpatient psychiatric settings. The study is a six-site, two-arm, single-blinded, superiority randomized controlled trial (RCT). Participants are randomly assigned (1:1) to the intervention or control group. Aiming to recruit 184 participants, with an assumed drop-out rate of 22%, we will be able to detect a 24% difference in the main outcome of employment/education with 90% power. We make assessments at baseline and at 6- and 12-month follow-ups. Outcome data on employment/education, medication, and current psychiatric treatment is obtained monthly through phone based short assessments. The primary outcome is steady participation for at least 50% of the 12-month follow-up in competitive employment and/or mainstream education. Secondary employment outcomes capture length of employment/education, time to first employment/education, monthly wages/educational attainment, and social return on investment (SROI). Secondary non-employment outcomes include subjective quality of life, psychopathology, substance use, relapse, hospitalization, and functional impairment. To be eligible, participants must be between 16 and 35 years, fulfill diagnostic criteria for early psychosis, and be interested in competitive employment and/or mainstream education. DISCUSSION: In SEEearly, we hypothesize that participants with psychosis, who receive TAU plus SEE, present with better primary and secondary outcomes than participants, who receive TAU alone. Positive results of this study will justify SEE as an evidence-based strategy for clinical routine treatment in people with early psychosis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: SEEearly was registered nationally and internationally in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS; identifier: DRKS00029660) on October 14, 2022.

Two sides of the same coin? The association between suicide stigma and suicide normalisation.

AIMS: Evidence suggests that suicide stigma (i.e. negative attitudes towards persons affected by suicide/suicidality) and suicide normalisation (i.e. liberal attitudes towards suicide) are both associated with increased suicide risk. Despite conceptual similarities and potential interaction, suicide stigma and suicide normalisation have usually been investigated separately. We used cross-sectional data from a community sample to test the association between suicide stigma and suicide normalisation as well as to identify their respective determinants and consequences. METHODS: Participants were N = 3.269 adults recruited from an established online-panel using quotas to reflect the composition of the German general population with regard to age, gender, education and region. We collected information about suicide stigma, suicide normalisation, intentions to seek help for suicidality, current suicidality, suicide literacy, negative mood and socio-demographic variables. We used regression modelling to determine the association between suicide stigma and suicide normalisation as well as to identify their determinants and consequences. RESULTS: Suicide stigma and suicide normalisation were inversely associated so that higher suicide stigma scores were linked to lower suicide normalisation. More suicide stigma was associated with reduced intentions to seeking professional help, increased willingness to seek help from family and friends and lower odds to experience current suicidality, however the association between suicide stigma and intentions to seek professional help diminished after controlling for confounding variables. Increased suicide normalisation was linked to reduced intentions to seek help from professionals or family and friends, as well as higher odds to experience current suicidality, even after controlling for confounding variables. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that interventions to reduce public suicide stigma are at risk to unintentionally increase suicide normalisation, which appears to be a key barrier to seeking help for suicidality. Future research should therefore identify strategies to improve attitudes towards persons affected by suicidality that avoid normalisation, i.e. do not convey the message of suicide as an acceptable solution for difficult life situations. One strategy with great potential to safely reduce public suicide sigma could be interventions that stimulate interpersonal contact with affected persons sharing their recovery story.

[Suicide stigma and suicide prevention]. / Suizidstigma und Suizidprävention.

In many societies suicide was and is an extremely controversial topic. This review article outlines the historical background of social condemnation of suicidal thoughts and actions in the western world. It summarizes current research results about the consequences of suicide stigma for affected persons and its relevance for suicide prevention. Finally, the next steps in research and prevention are discussed. Over time and in different cultures, the societal judgement of suicide has greatly varied. During antiquity, some philosophers viewed suicide negatively and by the fifth century AD suicide was widely condemned by societies across the western world. Until today suicide remains a taboo topic in Germany and other countries. Current research showed that the social condemnation of suicidal thoughts and behavior (i.e. suicide stigma) is an additional stressor among persons who experience or have experienced suicidality and their relatives. Furthermore, suicide stigma is considered to be a central barrier to seeking help for and disclosure of suicidality. Despite its relevance for suicide prevention, only a few interventions to reduce suicide stigma among members of the general public and to support affected persons in dealing with suicide stigma exist.

Microaggressions towards people affected by mental health problems: a scoping review.

AIMS: This review aims to understand the scope of the literature regarding mental health-related microaggressions towards people affected by mental health problems. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted to explore this question. Four electronic health-oriented databases were searched alongside Google Scholar. As per scoping review principles, the inclusion criteria were developed iteratively. The results of included studies were synthesised using a basic narrative synthesis approach, utilising principles of thematic analysis and thematic synthesis where appropriate. RESULTS: A total of 1196 records were identified, of which 17 met inclusion criteria. Of these, 12 were peer-reviewed journal articles, three were research degree theses and two were book chapters. Six included empirical studies were qualitative, four were quantitative and two employed a mixed-methods design. Within these, five qualitative studies aimed to describe the nature of mental health microaggressions experienced by people with mental health problems. Themes identified in a thematic synthesis of these five studies included stereotypes about mental illness, invalidating peoples' experience and blaming people with mental illness for their condition. The included publications informed on the perpetration of mental health microaggressions by family, friends, health professionals and social workers. In addition, two studies created scales, which were then used in cross-sectional surveys of the general public and community members to assess characteristics, such as right-wing political views, associated with endorsement of mental health microaggressions. A consensus definition of microaggressions emerged from the included studies: microaggressions are brief, everyday slights, snubs or insults, that may be subtle or ambiguous, but communicate a negative message to a target person based on their membership of a marginalised group, in this case, people affected by mental illness. CONCLUSIONS: The study of mental health microaggressions is an emerging, heterogeneous field, embedded in the wider stigma and discrimination literature. It has been influenced by earlier work on racial microaggressions. Both can be ambiguous and contradictory, which creates difficulty defining the boundaries of the concept, but also underpins the key theoretical basis for the negative impact of microaggressions. Mental illness is a more concealable potential type of identity, so it follows that the reported perpetrators of microaggressions are largely friends, family and professionals. This has implications for intervening to reduce the impact of microaggressions. There are several challenges facing research in this area, and further work is needed to understand the impact of mental health microaggressions on people affected by mental health problems.

Involuntary psychiatric hospitalisation, stigma stress and recovery: a 2-year study.

AIMS: Compulsory admission can be experienced as devaluing and stigmatising by people with mental illness. Emotional reactions to involuntary hospitalisation and stigma-related stress may affect recovery, but longitudinal data are lacking. We, therefore, examined the impact of stigma-related emotional reactions and stigma stress on recovery over a 2-year period. METHOD: Shame and self-contempt as emotional reactions to involuntary hospitalisation, stigma stress, self-stigma and empowerment, as well as recovery were assessed among 186 individuals with serious mental illness and a history of recent involuntary hospitalisation. RESULTS: More shame, self-contempt and stigma stress at baseline were correlated with increased self-stigma and reduced empowerment after 1 year. More stigma stress at baseline was associated with poor recovery after 2 years. In a longitudinal path analysis more stigma stress at baseline predicted poorer recovery after 2 years, mediated by decreased empowerment after 1 year, controlling for age, gender, symptoms and recovery at baseline. CONCLUSION: Stigma stress may have a lasting detrimental effect on recovery among people with mental illness and a history of involuntary hospitalisation. Anti-stigma interventions that reduce stigma stress and programs that enhance empowerment could improve recovery. Future research should test the effect of such interventions on recovery.

Coping with stigma and discrimination: evidence from mental health service users in England.

AIMS: Mental health stigma and discrimination are significant problems. Common coping orientations include: concealing mental health problems, challenging others and educating others. We describe the use of common stigma coping orientations and explain variations within a sample of English mental health service users. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey data were collected as part of the Viewpoint survey of mental health service users' experiences of discrimination (n = 3005). Linear regression analyses were carried out to identify factors associated with the three stigma coping orientations. RESULTS: The most common coping orientation was to conceal mental health problems (73%), which was strongly associated with anticipated discrimination. Only 51% ever challenged others because of discriminating behaviour, this being related to experienced discrimination, but also to higher confidence to tackle stigma. CONCLUSIONS: Although stigma coping orientations vary by context, individuals often choose to conceal problems, which is associated with greater anticipated and experienced discrimination and less confidence to challenge stigma. The direction of this association requires further investigation.

Mental illness stigma and suicidality: the role of public and individual stigma.

AIMS: Suicide rates are increased among unemployed individuals and mental illness stigma can contribute to both unemployment and suicidality. Persons with mental illness perceive negative attitudes among the general public and experience discrimination in their everyday life (=public stigma components) potentially leading to self-stigma and anticipated discrimination (=individual stigma components). Previous research found evidence for an association between aspects of mental illness stigma and suicidality, but has not yet clarified the underlying pathways explaining how different stigma components interact and contribute to suicidal ideation. METHOD: Public and individual stigma components and their association with suicidal ideation were examined among 227 unemployed persons with mental illness. A path model linking public stigma components (experienced discrimination, perceived stigma) with suicidal ideation, mediated by individual stigma components (anticipated discrimination, self-stigma), was examined using structural equation modelling within Mplus. RESULTS: Our sample was equally split in terms of gender, on average 43 years old and about half reported no suicidal ideation during the past 30 days. In bivariate analyses all stigma components were significantly associated with suicidal ideation. In the path model and controlling for symptoms, the association between experienced discrimination and suicidal ideation was fully mediated by anticipated discrimination and self-stigma. Perceived stigma's contribution to suicidal ideation was fully mediated by anticipated discrimination, but not by self-stigma. CONCLUSIONS: In general, programmes addressing multiple stigma components seem to be most effective in improving suicide prevention. Besides interventions targeting negative attitudes and discriminating behaviours of the general public, programmes to support persons with mental illness in coping with perceived and experienced stigma could improve suicide prevention. Future studies should test the short- and long-term effects of such interventions on suicidality and further investigate the role of stigma coping (e.g. secrecy) and emotional consequences (e.g. hopelessness and loneliness) for the association between stigma components and suicidality.

[Stigma - risk factor and consequence of suicidal behavior : Implications for suicide prevention]. / Stigma ­ Risikofaktor und Konsequenz suizidalen Verhaltens : Implikationen für die Suizidprävention.

Mental illness, previous suicidal behavior and loss of a relative by suicide are strong risk factors for suicidality. Both mental illness and suicide are stigmatized, which is a burden for those affected and potentially contributes to suicidality among stigmatized individuals. Many consequences of stigma, e. g. social isolation, low self-esteem and hopelessness, are well-known predictors of suicidality. Interventions to reduce stigmatization might therefore be an important component of successful suicide prevention. This paper discusses the currently available knowledge regarding this hypothesis. Many studies confirmed the association between the stigmatization of mental illness and suicidality and there is initial evidence for the influence of suicide stigma and suicidality. Nevertheless, the effectiveness of anti-stigma interventions to reduce suicidality and prevent suicide has not yet been tested. Reducing stigma among members of the general population and mental health care professionals as well as programs to support individuals in coping with stigmatization could be important components of successful suicide prevention.

Stigma-related stress, shame and avoidant coping reactions among members of the general population with elevated symptom levels.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether mental illness stigma affects individuals with subthreshold syndromes outside clinical settings. We therefore investigated the role of different stigma variables, including stigma-related stress and shame reactions, for avoidant stigma coping among members of the general population with elevated symptom levels. METHODS: Based on a representative population survey, general stress resilience, stigma variables, shame about having a mental illness as well as avoidant stigma coping (secrecy and social withdrawal) were assessed by self-report among 676 participants with elevated symptom levels. Stigma variables and resilience were examined as predictors of avoidant stigma coping in a path model. RESULTS: Increased stigma stress was predicted by lower general stress resilience as well as by higher levels of perceived stigma, group identification and perceived legitimacy of discrimination. More shame was associated with higher perceived legitimacy. Lower resilience as well as more perceived stigma, group identification and perceived legitimacy predicted avoidant coping. Stigma stress partly mediated effects of resilience, perceived stigma and group identification on avoidant coping; shame partly mediated effects of perceived legitimacy on coping. Stigma stress and shame were also directly and positively related to avoidant stigma coping. Analyses were adjusted for symptoms, neuroticism and sociodemographic variables. CONCLUSIONS: Stigma may affect a larger proportion of the population than previously thought because stigma variables predicted secrecy and withdrawal among members of the general population with elevated, but overall mild symptom levels. Avoidant stigma coping likely has harmful effects, potentially exacerbating pre-existing psychological distress and undermining social networks. This highlights the need to reduce public stigma as well as to support individuals with subthreshold syndromes in their coping with stigma stress and shame reactions.

Mental illness stigma, secrecy and suicidal ideation.

AIMS: Whether the public stigma associated with mental illness negatively affects an individual, largely depends on whether the person has been labelled 'mentally ill'. For labelled individuals concealing mental illness is a common strategy to cope with mental illness stigma, despite secrecy's potential negative consequences. In addition, initial evidence points to a link between stigma and suicidality, but quantitative data from community samples are lacking. METHODS: Based on previous literature about mental illness stigma and suicidality, as well as about the potential influence of labelling processes and secrecy, a theory-driven model linking perceived mental illness stigma and suicidal ideation by a mediation of secrecy and hopelessness was established. This model was tested separately among labelled and unlabelled persons using data derived from a Swiss cross-sectional population-based study. A large community sample of people with elevated psychiatric symptoms was examined by interviews and self-report, collecting information on perceived stigma, secrecy, hopelessness and suicidal ideation. Participants who had ever used mental health services were considered as labelled 'mentally ill'. A descriptive analysis, stratified logistic regression models and a path analysis testing a three-path mediation effect were conducted. RESULTS: While no significant differences between labelled and unlabelled participants were observed regarding perceived stigma and secrecy, labelled individuals reported significantly higher frequencies of suicidal ideation and feelings of hopelessness. More perceived stigma was associated with suicidal ideation among labelled, but not among unlabelled individuals. In the path analysis, this link was mediated by increased secrecy and hopelessness. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this study indicate that among persons labelled 'mentally ill', mental illness stigma is a contributor to suicidal ideation. One explanation for this association is the relation perceived stigma has with secrecy, which introduces negative emotional consequences. If our findings are replicated, they would suggest that programmes empowering people in treatment for mental illness to cope with anticipated and experienced discrimination as well as interventions to reduce public stigma within society could improve suicide prevention.

The link between mental health-related discrimination and suicidality: service user perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Suicide is a major global public health issue. Mental illness is a risk factor for suicide, but as many individuals with a diagnosed mental health problem do not experience suicidal ideation or attempt suicide, other individual and societal factors must be considered. Mental illness-related discrimination is one potential risk factor. METHOD: Using mixed methods, the influence of discrimination on suicidality amongst 194 individuals diagnosed with depression, bipolar or schizophrenia spectrum disorders was investigated. Qualitative interviews with a sub-sample of 58 individuals who reported a link between experience of discrimination and suicidality were analysed using framework analysis. Quantitative methods were used to examine the model derived from qualitative analyses. RESULTS: Results indicate that the experience of discrimination led 38% of the overall sample of 194 participants, to suicidal feelings and 20% reported that it contributed to making a suicide attempt. The qualitative model derived from interviews with a sub-sample of 58 participants suggested that the experience of discrimination is experienced as a stressor that exceeds coping resources, leading to a negative self-image and a perception of decreased supportive networks/social structure. The anticipation of further negative events and treatment, and the perception of a lack of supportive networks led individuals in this study to feelings of hopelessness and suicidality. Quantitative analyses provided support for the model. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that both psychological therapies aimed at improving coping skills and population-level anti-stigma interventions that reduce the occurrence of discrimination may provide some protection against suicide amongst individuals with mental health problems.

Collective levels of stigma and national suicide rates in 25 European countries.

AIMS: There is substantial diversity in national suicide rates, which has mainly been related to socio-economic factors, as well as cultural factors. Stigma is a cultural phenomenon, determining the level of social acceptance or rejection of persons with mental illness in a society. In this study, we explore whether national suicide rates are related to the degree of mental illness stigma in that country. METHODS: We combine the data on country-level social acceptance (Eurobarometer) with the data on suicide rates and socio-economic indicators (Eurostat) for 25 European countries. RESULTS: In a linear regression model controlling for socio-economic indicators, the social acceptance of someone with a significant mental health problem in 2010 was negatively correlated with age standardised national suicide rates in the same year (ß -0.46, p = 0.014). This association also held true when combining national suicide rates with death rates due to events of undetermined intent. CONCLUSIONS: Stigma towards persons with mental health problems may contribute to differences in suicide rates in a country. We hypothesise possible mechanisms explaining this link, including stigma as a stressor and social isolation as a consequence of stigma.

What is the impact of mental health-related stigma on help-seeking? A systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies.

BACKGROUND: Individuals often avoid or delay seeking professional help for mental health problems. Stigma may be a key deterrent to help-seeking but this has not been reviewed systematically. Our systematic review addressed the overarching question: What is the impact of mental health-related stigma on help-seeking for mental health problems? Subquestions were: (a) What is the size and direction of any association between stigma and help-seeking? (b) To what extent is stigma identified as a barrier to help-seeking? (c) What processes underlie the relationship between stigma and help-seeking? (d) Are there population groups for which stigma disproportionately deters help-seeking? METHOD: Five electronic databases were searched from 1980 to 2011 and references of reviews checked. A meta-synthesis of quantitative and qualitative studies, comprising three parallel narrative syntheses and subgroup analyses, was conducted. RESULTS: The review identified 144 studies with 90,189 participants meeting inclusion criteria. The median association between stigma and help-seeking was d = - 0.27, with internalized and treatment stigma being most often associated with reduced help-seeking. Stigma was the fourth highest ranked barrier to help-seeking, with disclosure concerns the most commonly reported stigma barrier. A detailed conceptual model was derived that describes the processes contributing to, and counteracting, the deterrent effect of stigma on help-seeking. Ethnic minorities, youth, men and those in military and health professions were disproportionately deterred by stigma. CONCLUSIONS: Stigma has a small- to moderate-sized negative effect on help-seeking. Review findings can be used to help inform the design of interventions to increase help-seeking.

The state of the art in European research on reducing social exclusion and stigma related to mental health: a systematic mapping of the literature.

Stigma and social exclusion related to mental health are of substantial public health importance for Europe. As part of ROAMER (ROAdmap for MEntal health Research in Europe), we used systematic mapping techniques to describe the current state of research on stigma and social exclusion across Europe. Findings demonstrate growing interest in this field between 2007 and 2012. Most studies were descriptive (60%), focused on adults of working age (60%) and were performed in Northwest Europe-primarily in the UK (32%), Finland (8%), Sweden (8%) and Germany (7%). In terms of mental health characteristics, the largest proportion of studies investigated general mental health (20%), common mental disorders (16%), schizophrenia (16%) or depression (14%). There is a paucity of research looking at mechanisms to reduce stigma and promote social inclusion, or at factors that might promote resilience or protect against stigma/social exclusion across the life course. Evidence is also limited in relation to evaluations of interventions. Increasing incentives for cross-country research collaborations, especially with new EU Member States and collaboration across European professional organizations and disciplines, could improve understanding of the range of underpinning social and cultural factors which promote inclusion or contribute toward lower levels of stigma, especially during times of hardship.

Shame, perceived knowledge and satisfaction associated with mental health as predictors of attitude patterns towards help-seeking.

Aims. To examine stigma- and knowledge-related barriers to help-seeking among members of the general population. Methods. In a representative survey of young to middle-aged Swiss adults (n = 8875), shame about a potential own mental illness, perceived knowledge about and satisfaction with one's mental health, psychiatric symptoms and attitudes towards help-seeking were assessed. Results. A latent profile analysis of all participants yielded two groups with different attitudes towards help-seeking. Relative to the majority, a one-in-four subgroup endorsed more negative attitudes towards seeking professional help, including psychiatric medication, and was characterized by more shame, less perceived knowledge, higher satisfaction with their mental health, younger age, male gender and lower education. Among participants with high symptom levels (n = 855), a third subgroup was reluctant to seek help in their private environment and characterized by high symptoms as well as low satisfaction with their mental health. Conclusions. Shame as an emotional proxy of self-stigma as well as poor subjective mental health literacy may be independent barriers to help-seeking. Interventions to increase mental health service use could focus on both variables and on those individuals with more negative views about professional help, in the general public as well as among people with a current mental illness.

Ingroup perception and responses to stigma among persons with mental illness.

OBJECTIVE: Mental illness stigma is common, but it is unclear why it affects some individuals more than others. We tested the hypothesis that the way persons with mental illness perceive their ingroup (people with mental illness) in terms of group value, group identification and entitativity (perception of the ingroup as a coherent unit) shapes their reaction to stigma. METHOD: Ingroup perceptions, perceived legitimacy of discrimination and reactions to stigma (educating or helping others, social performance, secrecy, social distance, hopelessness) were assessed among 85 people with mental illness using questionnaires and a standardized role-play test. RESULTS: Controlling for depression and perceived discrimination, high group value and low perceived legitimacy of discrimination predicted positive reactions to stigma. High group identification and entitativity predicted positive reactions only in the context of high group value or low perceived legitimacy of discrimination. CONCLUSION: Group value and perceived legitimacy of discrimination may be useful targets to help people with mental illness to better cope with stigma.