Involvement and burden of informal caregivers of patients with mental illness: the mediating role of affiliated stigma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The fear and lack of understanding of mental illness can lead to stigma. The stigma of mental illness affects not only individuals who suffer from it, but also the caregivers. Stigma among caregivers can lead to delay in seeking care, poor adherence to treatment and a high risk of relapse. Caregivers of patients with mental illness are at an increased risk of distress due to the burden to stigma and caregiving burden. An increase in caregivers' burden can lead to a reduction in caregivers' involvement. There is a relationship between caregivers' involvement, burden, and affiliated stigma. The present study examined the mediating role of affiliated stigma in the relationship between caregivers' burden and involvement among informal caregivers of hospital-admitted patients with mental illness in Uganda. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 428 informal caregivers (mean age: 39.6 years [SD±14.6]; females = 62.1%). Information was collected regarding sociodemographic characteristics, affiliated stigma, and the involvement and burden of informal caregivers. RESULTS: The findings indicate that affiliated stigma serves as a full mediator between the caregiver's roles and involvement (β=15.97, p<0.001). Being female increased the caregivers' burden of caregiving (β= -0.23, p<0.001). CONCLUSION: The findings in the present study suggest that intervention to address affiliated stigma among caregivers of patients with mental illness should be incorporated into mainstream mental health care to reduce the caregiving burden.
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) | 0.000 | 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".