Interventions to Reduce Mental Health Stigma in Young People
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Importance: Mental health stigma is a considerable barrier to help-seeking among young people. Objective: To systematically review and meta-analyze randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of interventions aimed at reducing mental health stigma in young people. Data Sources: Comprehensive searches were conducted in the CENTRAL, CINAHL, Embase, PubMed, and PsycINFO databases from inception to February 27, 2024. Search terms included "stigma," "mental health," "mental disorders," "adolescents," "youth," and "randomized controlled trial." Study Selection: Inclusion criteria encompassed RCTs involving interventions aimed at reducing mental health stigma among young people (aged 10-24 years). Studies had to report outcomes related to stigma or help-seeking behaviors. Exclusion criteria included grey literature and studies without results. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Data were extracted independently by 7 authors (M.A.C., D.N., F.B., S.C., Á.I.L., J.C., V.M.) using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Three-level multivariate meta-analyses were conducted to account for within-study correlations and to maximize data use. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) (Hedges g) and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs were calculated. The data analysis was conducted from May 30 through July 4, 2024. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes included stigma-related knowledge, attitudes, behaviors, and general stigma. Help-seeking outcomes were categorized into attitudes, intentions, and behaviors. Secondary outcomes included self-efficacy and empowerment. Results: A total of 97 studies were included in the systematic review, representing 43 852 young people (mean [IQR] age, 18.7 [15.8-21.3] years; mean [IQR] females, 59.2% [49.4%-72.0%]), and 74 studies were included in 3-level multivariate meta-analyses. Significant short-term effect sizes were found for stigma-related knowledge (SMD, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.43-0.89), attitudes (SMD, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.20-0.56), behaviors (SMD, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.13-0.45), and general stigma (SMD, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.06-0.34) and for help-seeking attitudes (SMD, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.09-0.28) and intentions (SMD, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.07-0.21). Social contact interventions had a greater influence on stigma-related behaviors than did educational approaches. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that interventions to reduce mental health stigma among youth are beneficial in the short term. Further high-quality RCTs with long-term follow-up are needed to better understand and enhance these interventions' outcomes.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».