MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133471477 · doi:10.1177/1742395310395959

‘It’s something that I manage but it is not who I am’: reflections on internalized stigma in individuals with bipolar disorder

2011· article· en· W2133471477 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Erin E. Michalak, James Livingston, Rachelle Hole, Melinda Suto, Sandra Hale, Candace Haddock

Bibliographic record

VenueChronic Illness · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Treatment and Access
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusBC Mental Health & Substance Use ServicesUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPsychologyThematic analysisBipolar disorderStigma (botany)DistressQualitative researchClinical psychologyQuality of life (healthcare)PsychiatryPsychotherapistMood

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bipolar disorder (BD) is a complex chronic condition associated with substantial costs, both at a personal and societal level. Growing research indicates that experiences with stigma may play a significant role in contributing to the distress, disability, and poor quality of life (QoL) often experienced in people with BD. Here, we present a sub-set of findings from a qualitative study of self-management strategies utilized by high functioning Canadian individuals with BD. Specifically, we describe a theme relating to participants' experiences and understandings of internalized stigma. Descriptive qualitative methods were used including purposeful sampling and thematic analysis. High functioning individuals with BD type I or II (N = 32) completed quantitative scales to assess symptoms, functioning and QoL, and participated in an individual interview or focus group to discuss the self-management strategies that they use to maintain or regain wellness. Thematic analysis identified several themes, including one relating to internalized stigma. Within this, four additional themes were identified: stigma expectations and experiences, sense of self/identity, judicious disclosure, and moving beyond internalised stigma. One of the more unique aspects of the study is that it involves a participant sample that is managing well with their illness, which differs from the norm in biomedical research that typically focuses on pathology, problems and dysfunction.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.074

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0180.020
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0030.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.099
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.291 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations86
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChronic IllnessSame topicMental Health Treatment and AccessFrench-language works237,207