Perceptions and experiences of stigma among parents of children with developmental disorders in Ethiopia: A qualitative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although stigma related to developmental disorders (DD) has been associated with poor mental health among caregivers, an in-depth understanding of factors that influence internalisation of stigma by caregivers is missing. The aim of our study was to explore perceptions and experiences of stigma among parents of children with DD in Ethiopia and examine the contributing and protective factors for internalised stigma based on the perspectives of the parents themselves. We conducted in-depth interviews with eighteen parents (fourteen mothers, four fathers) in Addis Ababa (between December 25, 2017 and January 8, 2018) and the rural town of Butajira (between August 08, 2018 and August 16, 2018). We analysed the data using thematic analysis. Parents perceived and experienced different forms of stigma that were directed towards their child (public stigma) and themselves (courtesy stigma). Some parents also described how they isolated themselves and their child from social life (affiliate stigma). Parents perceived the negative consequence of stigma on the lives of their child with DD, siblings and themselves. Most parents also described examples of positive reactions and support from their own family and the community. Participants' accounts suggested supportive contributions and positive responses from the general public came primarily from those who had better awareness of DD. Not all parents in our study internalised the stigma that was directed at them. Whilst perceived family support and acceptance and increased awareness about DD appeared to help some parents not to internalise stigma, the perceived lack of social support and acceptance made some parents vulnerable to internalised stigma. These findings can inform anti-stigma intervention priorities. Awareness-raising activities targeting the community as a whole as well as interventions targeting parents themselves are likely to be beneficial. Interventions should consider the wellbeing of the whole family unit rather than focus on individuals alone.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".