Qualitative study to explore the perspectives and mental health experiences of first episode psychosis patients and their caregivers in North India
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The onset of psychosis brings unfamiliar experiences that can be disturbing for patients and their caregivers. Few studies from India (only one from North India) have examined these experiences from the perspective of the patient and caregiver. We explored experiences of first episode psychosis (FEP) patients and their caregivers within a North Indian context. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews were conducted in 2019 with ten FEP patients and their caregivers (total n=20) receiving out-patient care in a tertiary care centre. Topic guides focused on concerns/complaints, symptoms, help-seeking, and barriers and facilitators to treatment. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and analysed using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: Main categories of responses from patients and caregivers included: initial complaints for seeking help, initial emotional response, barriers to seeking treatment, perceived dysfunction and improvement, experienced stigma, understanding about illness, early follow-up, preventive measures and awareness programs. Caregivers undergo myriad of emotional reactions including anger, anxiety, guilt, and confusion. Symptoms other than psychotic symptoms were the primary complaint upon seeking help, and there was lack of understanding about the psychosocial model of care (role of medications acknowledged with little awareness regarding psychosocial interventions in recovery). Persisting occupational dysfunction despite perceived symptomatic improvement was described by both patients and caregivers. CONCLUSION: North Indian patients with FEP lack awareness of symptoms. Therefore, onus for seeking help often falls on their caregivers. Psychoeducation from first contact with services and increasing awareness about psychotic illness within the community might help address lack of awareness about symptoms, mental health services, early signs of relapse, and importance of psychosocial interventions in achieving functional recovery.
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".