Relationship between Stigma and Self-Concept in Individuals with Mental Illness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Stigma is a key problem for individuals with mental illness, which is a negative label through which the community reacts adversely towards the mentally ill. Persons with mental illness may internalize mental illness stigma and experience diminished self-concept. Aim: This study aimed to assess the relationship between stigma and self-concept in individuals with mental illness Design: A descriptive design was utilized in this study. Setting: The current study was conducted at psychiatric outpatient clinics in El-Fayoum General Hospital. Subjects: convenient sample (80) of patients with mental illness was recruited for this study. Data collection tools: three tools were utilized in this study; 1) structured interview Questionnaire to assess socio-demographic data and patient medical history, 2) The internalized stigma of mental illness inventory to assess stigma, and 3) Self–concept Questionnaire to assess self concept. Results: this study revealed that, nearly three quarter of the studied sample (73.8%) experienced stigma, quarter of them25% of them had fair self-concept and more than half of them 57.5 had low self-concept, however there were statistical significance relation between stigma and levels of self–concept .Conclusion: this study results concluded that there were statistical significance relation between stigma and total levels of self–concept.., nearly three quarters of the studied sample experienced stigma Recommendations: There is an urgent need for implementing strategies to fight stigma associated with mental illness which consequently affect their self-concept.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".