Internalized stigma, depression and quality of life in schizophrenia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction People with a schizophrenia experience higher levels of stigma. Objectives Our aim was to explore the relationship between internalized stigma, depression and quality of life (QoL) in these patients. Methods This is a cross-sectional and analytical study including 37 stabilized patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder followed up in the outpatient psychiatry department at Hedi Chaker hospital university of Sfax, between August and October 2019. The Internalized Stigma of Mental Illness scale (ISMI-29) was used to assess internalized stigma and its five dimensions. We used the Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire (Q-LES-Q-SF) to assess QoL and the Calgary Depression Scale (CDS) to evaluate depression. Results 73% of these patients were followed for schizophrenia and 27% for schizoaffective disorder. The global mean score of ISMI was 71.95. The mean scores of alienation, stereotype endorsement, perceived discrimination, social withdrawal and stigma resistance were 15.16, 16.54, 12.95, 15.65 and 11.38, respectively. The Q-LES-Q-SF mean score was 65.51. According to CDS, 18.9% of patients had depression with a mean score of 2.27. Internalized stigma scores (global and the five dimensions scores) were significantly and negatively associated with QoL enjoyment satisfaction score (respective p: p<0.001;p<0.001; p=0.004; p<0.001; p<0.001; p<0,001; p<0.001). Global ISMI score and the four first dimensions scores were positively associated with depressive patients (respective p: p=0.002, p<0.001, p=0.025, p=0.001 and p=0.003) while stigma resistance was negatively correlated with depression (p<0.001). Conclusions Our results confirmed that internalized stigma is associated with impaired QoL and depression in stabilized patients with schizophrenia-spectrum diagnosis.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".