Perceived stigma and community integration among clients of assertive community treatment.
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Facilitating the integration of persons with psychiatric disabilities is an important goal of community programs. In addition to limitations such as inadequate housing, poverty, and unemployment, a common barrier to community adjustment identified by people with psychiatric disabilities is their perception of being stigmatized. This study examined the relationships between perceived stigma and community integration in 95 clients of assertive community treatment (ACT) teams, using sequential multiple regression procedures. Findings indicate that despite their physical presence in the community and the intensive support they receive, ACT clients believe other community members will reject them. Moreover, this perception appears to interfere with their sense of belonging, particularly among those who also perceive less social support and who have greater psychosocial skill deficits. In the context of the present study, global self-esteem did not mediate this relationship. In addition to community focused antistigma campaigns, stigma-related issues should also be addressed with ACT clients themselves.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it