MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380853675 · doi:10.1016/j.ijlp.2023.101905

Stigma management during reintegration of older incarcerated adults with mental health issues: A qualitative analysis

2023· article· en· W4380853675 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Helene Seaward, Sophie Dieffenbacher, Jens Gaab, Marc Graf, Bernice S. Elger, Tenzin Wangmo

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Law and Psychiatry · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthStigma (botany)Thematic analysisSocial stigmaPsychiatryQualitative researchMental illnessPsychologyPublic healthForensic psychiatryMedicineNursingFamily medicineSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The number of older prisoners with mental health issues released from prisons and forensic psychiatric institutions is rising. Their successful integration is important due to its implications for the public's safety and the individual's health and well-being. However, reintegration efforts are hampered due to the double stigma attached to 'mental illness' and 'incarceration history'. To alleviate the burden of such stigma, affected persons and their social networks employ stigma management strategies. This study sought to investigate the stigma management strategies of mental health professionals supporting older incarcerated adults with mental health issues in their reintegration process. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews with 63 mental health professionals from Canada and Switzerland were carried out as part of the overall project. To address the reintegration topic, data from 18 interviews were used. Data analysis followed the thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: Mental health professionals emphasized the double stigmatization of their patients which impaired their quest for housing. Lengthy searches for placement frequently resulted in patients' unnecessary long stays in forensic programs. Nevertheless, participants outlined that they were at times successful in finding appropriate housing for their patients due to the use of certain stigma management strategies. They stated that they, first, established initial contacts with outside institutions, second, educated them about stigmatizing labels and, third, provided ongoing collaboration with public institutions. DISCUSSION: Incarcerated persons with mental health issues face double stigmatization that affects their reentry process. Our findings are interesting as they illustrate ways in which stigma can be reduced, and how the reentry process can be streamlined. Future research should include the perspectives of incarcerated adults with mental health issues to shed more light on the various options that they seek for successful reintegration after imprisonment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.378 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Law and PsychiatrySame topicCriminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisFrench-language works237,207