Internalized stigma and traumatizing effects of psychiatric hospitalization in adolescents: Is there any difference between being hospitalized in adult or adolescent inpatient psychiatric services?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Psychiatric hospitalization serves as a critical treatment modality. However, hospitalization may pose risks of traumatization or stigma. This study primarily examined the internalized stigma and traumatizing effects of psychiatric hospitalization on adolescents. Additionally, the treatment of adolescents within adult inpatient psychiatric services may yield differing stigmatization and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptomatology. Hence, the secondary objective was to discern the variance in stigmatization and PTSD symptoms between adolescents treated in adult inpatient psychiatric services (AIPS) and those in child and adolescent inpatient psychiatric services (CAIPS). METHOD: = 28), matched for age and gender. Assessments using the Child Posttraumatic Stress Disorder-Reaction Index and the Internalized Stigma Scale for Children and Adolescents (ISSCA) were conducted 6 months after discharge. RESULTS: 36.8% and 10.5% of adolescents exhibited "mild" and "very severe" PTSD symptoms, respectively. Adolescents treated in CAIPS had higher Child Posttraumatic Stress Disorder-Reaction Index scores than those in AIPS. However, there was no significant difference between the AIPS and CAIPS groups regarding ISSCA-self and ISSCA-perceived scores. CONCLUSIONS: The current findings underscore that psychiatric hospitalization can lead to traumatic experiences in adolescents, especially those treated in CAIPS. Providing informed care and emotional support during hospitalization could bolster resilience and facilitate recovery among these individuals. While adolescents are sometimes placed in AIPS, it is crucial that professionals are adequately trained and supported in managing this vulnerable population. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".