The Effects of Stigma on Recovery Attitudes in People With Anorexia Nervosa in Intensive Treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Self-stigma in individuals with anorexia nervosa (AN) may affect engagement in intensive treatment. The objective of this study was to test a Model of Self-Stigma to identify the influence of public stigma, internalized stigma, self-esteem, and self-efficacy on recovery attitudes in individuals in inpatient treatment for AN. Using a cross-sectional design, 36 female participants with AN completed questionnaires during the first week of intensive inpatient treatment. Better attitude towards recovery was positively correlated with higher self-esteem and self-efficacy and negatively correlated with greater internalized stigma and perceptions of others devaluing families of individuals with AN. Together, these factors accounted for 63% of the variance in recovery attitudes. Findings demonstrate the adverse effects perceived stigma towards families, self-stigma, and self-esteem have on recovery attitudes in individuals with AN. Clinical interventions are needed to challenge internalized stigma and bolster self-esteem to enhance individuals' recovery efforts.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".