Factors associated with nursing students' mental health-related stigma: A multisite cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Mental health-related stigma remains a complex and pervasive issue globally. It not only inhibits individuals from seeking help but also influences the quality of healthcare they receive. Despite extensive research on mental health-related stigma, there is still limited understanding of factors influencing mental health-related stigma among nursing students. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess the level of mental health-related stigma among Chinese nursing students and investigate possible associated factors. METHODS: Data were collected from the 2023 Psychology and Behavior Investigation of Chinese Residents (PBICR) survey. A total of 967 nursing students were included in the study. Multivariate stepwise linear regression analysis was conducted to examine the influencing factors of mental health stigma. RESULTS: The mean mental health-related stigma score among nursing students was 15.31 ± 5.23 (range = 0-27). Perceived stress (ß = 0.14, P = 0.001), self-efficacy (ß = 0.22, P < 0.001), academic stage (ß = 0.17, P < 0.001), depression (ß = 0.15, P < 0.001), and adverse life events (ß = 0.06, P = 0.044) were significantly associated with mental health-related stigma among nursing students (R2 = 0.147, adjusted R2 = 0.143, F = 33.214, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Nursing students in China exhibit a moderate level of mental health-related stigma, suggesting room for improvement. Perceived stress, self-efficacy, academic stage, depression, and adverse life events emerged as significant influencing factors for mental health-related stigma. These findings provide valuable insights for developing interventions to reduce mental health-related stigma among nursing students, ultimately enhancing their well-being and preparing them for becoming competent healthcare professionals in the future.

The stigma towards mental illness: Portuguese validation of the Opening Minds Stigma Scale for Healthcare Providers (OMS-HC).

Background: Stigma toward mental illness significantly contributes to a lower quality of healthcare that can be provided. There are few studies on this topic in Portugal, so validating a scale that can evaluate and study the stigma is paramount. The aim of this study was to validate the Opening Minds Stigma Scale for Portuguese healthcare professionals. Methods: A total of 503 participants were included in this study, and the majority was female (81.1%). The sample consisted mainly of psychologists (39.4%) and physicians (30.8%). Reliability and validity analyses were conducted and included exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Results: Our results suggest that a 12-item model was the most appropriate (RMSEA = 0.026, SRMR = 0.057, CFI = 0.979, TLI = 0.973, GFI = 0.955) compared to our 15-item model and the original model. Items 8, 9 and 10 were removed. The 12-item scale's internal consistency was adequate (α = 0.71; ω = 0.72). Conclusion: The 12-item model of the scale showed good reliability and validity and is appropriate for use with Portuguese healthcare professionals.

Exploring perspectives of stigma and discrimination among people with lived experience of mental health conditions: a co-produced qualitative study.

Background: Efforts to understand the mechanisms and consequences of mental health-related stigma and discrimination need to center the perspectives of people affected by these negative impacts, through research efforts that are led or co-led by people with lived experience (PWLE) of mental health conditions. Methods: This study used co-production principles to explore global perspectives of stigma and discrimination among people meeting the inclusion criteria of identifying as PWLEs and being willing to share their experiences of stigma and discrimination resulting from a diagnosis of a mental health condition, and who had also participated in anti-stigma activities. Participants were recruited online via a self-selecting snowball sampling method. Qualitative data were collected from respondents via an anonymous global online survey conducted between 12/01/2021 and 02/28/2022. The main outcomes assessed were open-ended, qualitative responses to questions exploring experiences of stigma and discrimination, experiences regarding diagnoses, language/terminology related to mental health, impact of stigma and discrimination, and involvement with anti-stigma interventions. Data were synthesised through digital text network analysis and thematic content analysis. Findings: A total of 198 respondents from over 30 countries across Europe, the Americas, Africa, Asia, and Australia/Oceania were included in the study. The results reflected five themes: 1) the role of language and words; 2) the role of media in perpetuating and reducing stigma; 3) societal reactions to mental health conditions and strategies to cope with these; 4) knowledge about activities to reduce stigma and discrimination and their impact; and 5) personal involvement in activities to reduce stigma and discrimination. Interpretation: The findings highlight that people with mental health conditions are aware of and experience stigma and discrimination across core domains of daily life. The importance of recognising the key role PWLEs can play in efforts to reduce stigma and discrimination was highlighted, and how they can be appropriately supported to contribute and have their experiential expertise recognised. Meaningful and authentic collaborations between PWLEs and other stakeholders can enhance the quality and relevance of strategies to reduce stigma and discrimination. This is, to our knowledge, the first study of its kind to use a co-production approach to explore experiences and reflections of stigma and discrimination related to mental health from a global perspective. However, the results are not broadly representative of the general PWLE population or suggestive of globally uniform experiences of stigma and discrimination. Funding: None.

Attitudes of psychiatrists towards people with mental illness: a cross-sectional, multicentre study of stigma in 32 European countries.

Background: Mental health-related stigma occurs among the public and professionals alike. The lived experience of mental illness has been linked to less stigmatising attitudes. However, data on psychiatrists and the relationship between stigmatising attitudes and psychotherapeutic activity or case discussion groups remains scarce. Methods: A cross-sectional multicentre study was performed in 32 European countries to investigate the lived experiences and attitudes of psychiatrists toward patients with mental illness as well as the relationship between stigma, psychosocial and professional factors. The self-reported, anonymous, internet-based Opening Minds Stigma Scale for Health Care Providers was used to measure the stigmatising attitudes. The survey was translated into the local language of each participating country. All participants were practising specialists and trainees in general adult or child and adolescent psychiatry. The study took place between 2nd October, 2019 and 9th July, 2021 and was preregistered at ClinicalTrial.gov (NCT04644978). Findings: A total of 4245 psychiatrists completed the survey. The majority, 2797 (66%), had completed training in psychiatry, and 3320 (78%) worked in adult psychiatry. The final regression model showed that across European countries more favourable attitudes toward people with mental illness were statistically significantly associated with the lived experience of participants (including seeking help for their own mental health conditions (d = -0.92, 95% confidence interval (CI) = -1.68 to -0.15, p = 0.019), receiving medical treatment for a mental illness (d = -0.88, 95% CI = -1.71 to -0.04, p = 0.040), as well as having a friend or a family member similarly affected (d = -0.68, 95% CI = -1.14 to -0.22, p = 0.004)), being surrounded by colleagues who are less stigmatising (d = -0.98, 95% CI = -1.26 to -0.70, p < 0.001), providing psychotherapy to patients (d = -1.14, 95% CI = -1.63 to -0.65 p < 0.001), and being open to (d = -1.69, 95% CI = -2.53 to -0.85, p < 0.001) and actively participating in (d = -0.94, 95% CI = -1.45 to -0.42, p < 0.001) case discussion, supervision, or Balint groups. Interpretation: Our study highlights the importance of psychotherapy training, supervision, case discussions and Balint groups in reducing the stigmatising attitudes of psychiatrists toward patients. As the findings represent cross-national predictors, Europe-wide policy interventions, national psychiatric education systems and the management of psychiatric institutions should take these findings into consideration. Funding: National Youth Talent Award (Ministry of Human Resources, Hungary, (NTP-NFTÖ-20-B-0134). All authors received no funding for their contribution.

Psychometric properties of the Opening Minds Stigma Scale for Health Care Providers in 32 European countries - A bifactor ESEM representation.

Aims: To measure the stigma of healthcare providers toward people suffering from mental illness, the Opening Minds Stigma Scale for Health Care Providers (OMS-HC) is a commonly applied instrument. However, this scale has not been thoroughly validated in many European countries, its psychometric properties are still unknown and data on practicing psychiatrists is lacking. Therefore, this multicenter study aimed to assess the psychometric characteristics of the 15-item OMS-HC in trainees and specialists in adult and child psychiatry in 32 countries across Europe. Materials and methods: The OMS-HC was conducted as an anonymous online survey and sent via Email to European adult and child psychiatrists. Parallel analysis was used to estimate the number of OMS-HC dimensions. Separate for each country, the bifactor ESEM, a bifactor exploratory structural equation modeling approach, was applied to investigate the factor structure of the scale. Cross-cultural validation was done based on multigroup confirmatory factor analyses and reliability measures. Results: A total of 4,245 practitioners were included, 2,826 (67%) female, 1,389 (33%) male. The majority (66%) of participants were specialists, with 78% working in adult psychiatry. When country data were analyzed separately, the bifactor model (higher-order factor solution with a general factor and three specific factors) showed the best model fit (for the total sample χ2/df = 9.760, RMSEA = 0.045 (0.042-0.049), CFI = 0.981; TLI = 0.960, WRMR = 1.200). The average proportion of variance explained by the general factor was high (ECV = 0.682). This suggests that the aspects of 'attitude,' 'disclosure and help-seeking,' and 'social distance' could be treated as a single dimension of stigma. Among the specific factors, the 'disclosure and help-seeking' factor explained a considerable unique proportion of variance in the observed scores. Conclusion: This international study has led to cross-cultural analysis of the OMS-HC on a large sample of practicing psychiatrists. The bifactor structure displayed the best overall model fit in each country. Rather than using the subscales, we recommend the total score to quantify the overall stigmatizing attitudes. Further studies are required to strengthen our findings in countries where the proposed model was found to be weak.

Mental health-related stigma and attitudes toward patient care among providers of mental health services in a rural Chinese county.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The increasing prevalence of mental illness and low treatment rate presents a pressing public health issue in China. Pervasive stigma is a significant barrier to mental health recovery and community inclusion. In particular, stigmatizing or supportive attitudes held by healthcare providers could either perpetuate or mitigate self-stigma of people with mental illness. Moreover, mental health resources are unevenly distributed in China, with most of them concentrated in urban centers and provincial capitals. This study explores healthcare providers' attitudes toward mental illness and the challenges they faced at work in a rural Chinese county. METHOD: Four focus groups were conducted with 36 healthcare providers from a three-tier mental healthcare system in a rural county in southwestern China. Focus group discussions were recorded and transcribed verbatim. The team employed a conventional content analysis approach for data analysis. All transcripts were double-coded by three bilingual team members who are native Chinese speakers. Coding discrepancies were resolved by consensus. RESULTS: Healthcare providers recruited from the county, township, and village levels varied in educational background, professional qualification, and experience of working with people with mental illness. Five thematic categories identified across four groups include (1) barriers to mental healthcare delivery, (2) keys to mental health recovery, (3) providers' attitudes toward providing care, (4) providers' perception toward patients and family members, and (5) providers' perception of training needs. CONCLUSIONS: This is a unique study that included healthcare providers from a three-tier healthcare system. Findings signal the importance of understanding healthcare practitioners' experiences and views to inform the design of training initiatives in rural or low-resource communities.

Factor structure of The Opening Minds Stigma Scale for Health Care Providers and psychometric properties of its Hungarian version.

BACKGROUND: The Opening Minds Stigma Scale for Health Care Providers (OMS-HC) is a widely used questionnaire to measure the stigmatising attitudes of healthcare providers towards patients with mental health problems. The psychometric properties of the scale; however, have never been investigated in Hungary. We aimed to thoroughly explore the factor structure of the OMS-HC and examine the key psychometric properties of the Hungarian version. METHODS: The OMS-HC is a self-report questionnaire that measures the overall stigmatising attitude by a total score, and three subscales can be calculated: Attitude, Disclosure and Help-seeking, and Social Distance. Our study population included specialists and trainees in adult and child psychiatry (n = 211). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were performed, and higher-order factors were tested. We calculated the test-retest reliability on a subgroup of our sample (n = 31) with a follow-up period of 1 month. The concurrent validity of the scale was measured with the Mental Illness: Clinician's Attitudes-4 scale (MICA-4). RESULTS: Three factors were extracted based on a parallel-analysis. A bifactor solution (a general factor and three specific factors) showed an excellent model-fit (root mean square error of approximation = 0.025, comparative fit index = 0.961, and Tucker-Lewis index = 0.944). The model-based reliability was low; however, the general factor showed acceptable reliability (coefficient omega hierarchical = 0.56). The scale demonstrated a good concurrent validity with the MICA-4 [intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) = 0.77]. The test-retest reliability was excellent for the general factor (ICC = 0.95) and good for the specific factors (ICC = 0.90, 0.88, and 0.84, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The three dimensions of the OMS-HC was confirmed, and the scale was found to be an adequate measure of the stigmatising attitude in Hungary. The bifactor model is more favourable as compared to the three correlated factor model; however, despite the excellent internal structure, its model-based reliability was low.

Review of mental-health-related stigma in Japan.

The aim of this study is to understand the nature and characteristics of mental-health-related stigma among Japanese people. We searched relevant studies in English or Japanese published since 2001 using MEDLINE and PsycINFO, and found 19 studies that examined mental-health-related stigma in Japan. Regarding knowledge about mental illness, reviewed studies showed that in the Japanese general population, few people think that people can recover from mental disorders. Psychosocial factors, including weakness of personality, are often considered the cause of mental illness, rather than biological factors. In addition, the majority of the general public in Japan keep a greater social distance from individuals with mental illness, especially in close personal relationships. Schizophrenia is more stigmatized than depression, and its severity increases the stigmatizing attitude toward mental illness. The literature also showed an association between more direct social contact between health professionals and individuals with mental illness and less stigmatization by these professionals. Less stigmatization by mental health professionals may be associated with accumulation of clinical experience and daily contact with people who have mental illness. Stigmatizing attitudes in Japan are stronger than in Taiwan or Australia, possibly due to institutionalism, lack of national campaigns to tackle stigma, and/or society's valuing of conformity in Japan. Although educational programs appear to be effective in reducing mental-health-related stigma, future programs in Japan need to address problems regarding institutionalism and offer direct social contact with people with mental illness.

Fighting the stigma caused by mental disorders: past perspectives, present activities, and future directions.

People who live with mental illnesses are among the most stigmatized groups in society. In 1996, in recognition of the particularly harsh burden caused by the stigma associated with schizophrenia, the WPA initiated a global anti-stigma program, Open-the-Doors. In 2005, a WPA Section on Stigma and Mental Health was created, with a broader mandate to reduce stigma and discrimination caused by mental disabilities in general. In light of these important developments, and the growing public health interest in stigma reduction, this paper reflects on the past perspectives that have led us to our current position, reviews present activities and accomplishments, and identifies challenges that the Section members will face in their future efforts to reduce the stigma caused by mental disorders.