A population study of public stigma about psychosis and its contributing factors among Chinese population in Hong Kong.

PURPOSE: Public stigma is an important barrier to the recovery of patients with psychosis. This study aimed to explore public stigma associated with a newly adopted Chinese name for psychosis 'si-jue-shi-tiao' in a representative Chinese population in Hong Kong, focusing on factors contributing to public stigma. Exposure to mass media and its relationship with the stigma were explored in detail. METHODS: Random telephone survey of general population in Hong Kong was conducted. Information including basic demographics, psychosis literacy, recent news recall about psychosis and stigma, measured with the revised Link's Perceived Discrimination-Devaluation Scale (LPDDS) were obtained. Univariate analysis of LPDDS score and demographic variables, news exposure, previous contacts with people with psychosis and knowledge about psychosis were conducted. Further hierarchical regression analysis was performed. RESULTS: A total of 1,016 subjects were interviewed. The sample was comparable with the whole Hong Kong population aged 18 years and above. Those of female gender, with higher educational level and better knowledge about symptoms and treatment of psychosis had higher score of LPDDS. The model significantly explained 8.3% of variance of LPDDS score (F(7, 895) = 12.606, p < .0001, p < .0001). The negative news recall had trend significance in the model. CONCLUSION: The finding suggested that discrimination among the general public against people with psychosis was still common. Specific strategies will need to be established in targeting media news reporting about psychosis, knowledge disseminating and needs of specific population. Further researches should be conducted to understand the mechanisms of the stigma development in relation to these factors so that more focused and effective strategies could be developed.

A systematic review on definitions and assessments of psychotic-like experiences.

AIMS: Psychotic-like experiences (PLEs) or subclinical psychotic experiences have received increased attention as some studies have suggested continuity between PLEs and psychotic disorders. However, epidemiological and correlational studies of PLEs showed mixed findings - it is observed that different studies use a wide variety of definitions of PLEs, as well as different assessment tools that are designed to capture such described experiences. The differences in definitions and assessment tools adopted could contribute to the discrepancy of findings. The current review aims to examine the definitions and assessment tools adopted in the studies of PLEs. METHODS: Literature search was conducted between October 2013 and February 2014 using three search engines: Medline, Web of Science and PubMed. RESULTS: A total of 76 papers met the selection criteria and were included in the current review. It is found that the majority of papers reviewed defined PLEs quantitatively using assessment tools and do not have a specific phenomenological definition, whereas assessment tools adopted have a wide variety. Furthermore, phenomenological studies of PLEs were rare. CONCLUSIONS: The variations in definitions and assessment tools of PLEs might contribute to mixed findings in researches. Reaching to a consensus through the study of phenomenology of PLEs is essential to further advancement of the research in this area.