MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2784802553 · doi:10.14740/jocmr3282w

A Brief Survey of Public Knowledge and Stigma Towards Depression

2018· article· en· W2784802553 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Treatment and Access
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of Science
KeywordsDepression (economics)Stigma (botany)WorryMedicinePsychiatryMental health literacyPersonalityHealth literacyClinical psychologyMental healthSocial stigmaPublic healthPsychologyMental illnessAnxietyHealth careFamily medicineSocial psychologyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The burden from depression is affected by the public's beliefs, stigma, and resulting behavior. Lack of knowledge, misunderstanding, and stigma about depressed people and their surroundings are barriers to improving their mental health. This study aimed to examine public beliefs regarding depression, especially how to recognize depression, treatment, and stigma. METHODS: A self-administered questionnaire was distributed to participants receiving an annual health checkup. We asked whether they agreed with four short sentences: "it is not necessary to worry about depression in a person behaving brightly" (misunderstanding about the behavior of depressed people), "rest is important for treating depression" (belief about the necessity of rest), "medicine is effective for treating depression" (belief about the effectiveness of pharmacotherapy) and "a weak personality causes depression" (stigma about the cause of depression). We also analyzed the association between these beliefs and factors such as health literacy, regularly visiting an outpatient clinic, history of depression, and demographic variables. RESULTS: Among 1,085 respondents (75.0% response rate), 54.5%, 75.6%, 58.9%, and 70.8% responded appropriately to the "misunderstanding about the behavior of depressed people", "necessity of rest", "effectiveness of pharmacotherapy", and "stigma about the cause of depression" items, respectively. Regarding stigma about the cause of depression, 30.7% of respondents agreed that a weak personality caused depression. Female sex and younger age group were associated with appropriate answers. Health literacy was only associated with appropriate beliefs about the effectiveness of pharmacotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Thirty percent of participants had the stigmatizing belief that a weak personality causes depression and only 58.9% believed in the effectiveness of pharmacotherapy for depression. Over 70% understood the necessity of rest and knew that depression is possible in those who act brighter. General health literacy alone might not improve knowledge and beliefs about depression. An educational intervention or campaign to reduce stigma toward depression and improve knowledge about the treatment of depression is needed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.028
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.498
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0280.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.667
GPT teacher head0.689
Teacher spread0.022 · 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