RETRACTED – The experiences of familial mental illness stigma among individuals living with mental illnesses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Persons with mental illnesses may experience stigma from their immediate family members in addition to other forms of stigma. Using semi-structured interviews, we investigated experiences of familial mental illness stigma among 15 people diagnosed with mental illnesses in a mid-sized city in Canada. We identified five themes that speak to participants' experiences of familial mental illness stigma and ways to reduce it. The themes include the following: diagnosis as a 'double-edged sword,' potential familial isolation, familial stigma as societal stigma localized, stories of acceptance, and confronting potential familial mental illness stigma. Participants' narratives indicate that familial mental illness stigma is rooted in the broader social or public stigma, which sees its way into familial relations as well. This stigma takes various forms, including relationship bias or unfair treatment, breakdown in romantic relationships, loss of status, verbal and emotional abuse, exclusion from decision-making, and alienation within their immediate and extended families. Familial mental illness stigma experiences negatively impact participant's psychological well-being and personal empowerment. However, participants also shared ways that family members create supportive environments or actively confront or prevent stigma. Overall, this study has contributed to knowledge on mental illness stigma, particularly familial mental illness stigma from the perspective of participants living with a mental illness in a high-income country. Suggestions for future research include a focus on strategies to prevent ongoing familial mental illness stigma and large-scale studies to explore familial mental illness stigma to understand why families might perpetrate stigma.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".