Stigma towards dependent drinking and its role on caregiving burden: A qualitative study from Goa, India
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Stigma towards alcohol use disorders is prevalent in India and can lead to social exclusion and hamper treatment access and outcomes. Family members of individuals with dependent drinking are often their primary caregivers and play a key role in decisions around help-seeking, treatment and recovery. The nature and role of stigma in caregiving, and the consequent burden on family caregivers of those with dependent drinking, has not been qualitatively studied in India. METHODS: We conducted in-depth interviews with: (i) men with probable alcohol dependence (n = 11); (ii) family caregivers (n = 12); and (iii) doctors with experience of treating alcohol dependence (n = 13) in community settings in Goa. Data were analysed using inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Two primary themes were identified from the data: (i) stigma in the form of ignorance, prejudice and discrimination; and (ii) the impact of this stigma on caregiving decisions and the mental health of caregivers. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: We found that stigma functioned as a barrier to a proper course of treatment and care, as well as a detrimental factor for caregiver's mental health and caregiving decision-making. Stigma towards dependent drinking in the forms of ignorance, prejudice and discrimination is prevalent within homes, workplaces and health systems and might exacerbate the caregiving burden among female family caregivers. Policies, educational programs and campaigns aimed at preventing stigma in these forms would likely enable access to more inclusive and appropriate health services, benefit the health of family caregivers and improve the treatment outcomes of drinkers.
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 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".