健康中的病耻感测量:系统综述。

IF 10 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
EClinicalMedicine Pub Date : 2025-07-24 eCollection Date: 2025-08-01 DOI:10.1016/j.eclinm.2025.103360
Sara Malone, Lara Counts, Luke Zabotka, Anneliese Williams, Nele Loecher, Kayla Wynja, Gemma Bryan, Robin Tanner, Ana Cáceres-Serrano, Gia Ferrara, Lucia Fuentes, Tharwa Bilbeisi, Marissa Maheu, Benjamin K Oelkers, Muna Ogwo, Lauren Yaeger, Asya Agulnik, Dylan Graetz
{"title":"健康中的病耻感测量:系统综述。","authors":"Sara Malone, Lara Counts, Luke Zabotka, Anneliese Williams, Nele Loecher, Kayla Wynja, Gemma Bryan, Robin Tanner, Ana Cáceres-Serrano, Gia Ferrara, Lucia Fuentes, Tharwa Bilbeisi, Marissa Maheu, Benjamin K Oelkers, Muna Ogwo, Lauren Yaeger, Asya Agulnik, Dylan Graetz","doi":"10.1016/j.eclinm.2025.103360","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Stigma experienced by individuals with disease is a barrier to health-seeking behaviors and outcomes. Our aim was to systematically review how stigma has been defined and measured and identify gaps in approaches to measurement and intervention.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Databases were searched for stigma measurement in health through July 2024. 8123 citations were screened. Data on definitions, measurement, psychometrics, and interventions were extracted. PROSPERO: CRD42023433176.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>We identified 2267 studies (2605 tools) from 101 countries. 396 (15.2%) tools focused on development and 2369 (91.0%) applied tools. Most tools assessed adults (77.2%). Over 750 stigma tools were identified; many tools were adapted (n = 674) or shortened (n = 446). 117 studies reported effective interventions, primarily in adults. Key gaps included lack of consensus on definitions, limited pediatric-focused research, and insufficient attention to structural drivers of stigma.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>This review calls for standardized, context-sensitive stigma measurement and interventions applicable across conditions and settings. Addressing these gaps is crucial to reducing the global burden of stigma and enhancing health outcomes. Future research should focus on unified conceptual approaches and definitions to develop globally adaptable tools and scalable interventions that address both the experiences and structural drivers of stigma.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>Components for the programs involved in this work have been funded by St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, the National Cancer Institute (3POCA021765-44S2), the American Lebanese Syrian Associated Charities, and Siteman Cancer Center. The views in this paper are those of the authors and don't necessarily reflect the funding agencies. The funding agencies were not involved in the writing or submitting of this work.</p>","PeriodicalId":11393,"journal":{"name":"EClinicalMedicine","volume":"86 ","pages":"103360"},"PeriodicalIF":10.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12311962/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Stigma measurement in health: a systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Sara Malone, Lara Counts, Luke Zabotka, Anneliese Williams, Nele Loecher, Kayla Wynja, Gemma Bryan, Robin Tanner, Ana Cáceres-Serrano, Gia Ferrara, Lucia Fuentes, Tharwa Bilbeisi, Marissa Maheu, Benjamin K Oelkers, Muna Ogwo, Lauren Yaeger, Asya Agulnik, Dylan Graetz\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.eclinm.2025.103360\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Stigma experienced by individuals with disease is a barrier to health-seeking behaviors and outcomes. Our aim was to systematically review how stigma has been defined and measured and identify gaps in approaches to measurement and intervention.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Databases were searched for stigma measurement in health through July 2024. 8123 citations were screened. Data on definitions, measurement, psychometrics, and interventions were extracted. PROSPERO: CRD42023433176.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>We identified 2267 studies (2605 tools) from 101 countries. 396 (15.2%) tools focused on development and 2369 (91.0%) applied tools. Most tools assessed adults (77.2%). Over 750 stigma tools were identified; many tools were adapted (n = 674) or shortened (n = 446). 117 studies reported effective interventions, primarily in adults. Key gaps included lack of consensus on definitions, limited pediatric-focused research, and insufficient attention to structural drivers of stigma.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>This review calls for standardized, context-sensitive stigma measurement and interventions applicable across conditions and settings. Addressing these gaps is crucial to reducing the global burden of stigma and enhancing health outcomes. Future research should focus on unified conceptual approaches and definitions to develop globally adaptable tools and scalable interventions that address both the experiences and structural drivers of stigma.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>Components for the programs involved in this work have been funded by St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, the National Cancer Institute (3POCA021765-44S2), the American Lebanese Syrian Associated Charities, and Siteman Cancer Center. The views in this paper are those of the authors and don't necessarily reflect the funding agencies. The funding agencies were not involved in the writing or submitting of this work.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11393,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"EClinicalMedicine\",\"volume\":\"86 \",\"pages\":\"103360\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":10.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12311962/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"EClinicalMedicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2025.103360\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/8/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EClinicalMedicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2025.103360","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/8/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:疾病个体所经历的耻辱感是寻求健康行为和结果的障碍。我们的目的是系统地回顾耻辱是如何定义和测量的,并确定测量和干预方法中的差距。方法:按照PRISMA指南进行系统评价。在数据库中检索截至2024年7月的健康病耻感测量。共筛选了8123篇引文。提取了有关定义、测量、心理测量和干预措施的数据。普洛斯彼罗:CRD42023433176。研究结果:我们从101个国家确定了2267项研究(2605种工具)。396个(15.2%)工具专注于开发,2369个(91.0%)应用工具。大多数工具评估的是成年人(77.2%)。确定了750多个柱头工具;许多工具被改进(n = 674)或缩短(n = 446)。117项研究报告了有效的干预措施,主要针对成人。主要差距包括对定义缺乏共识,以儿科为重点的研究有限,以及对病耻感的结构性驱动因素重视不足。解释:这篇综述呼吁标准化、情境敏感的病耻感测量和适用于各种条件和环境的干预措施。解决这些差距对于减轻全球耻辱负担和增进健康成果至关重要。未来的研究应侧重于统一的概念方法和定义,以开发全球适应的工具和可扩展的干预措施,以解决耻辱的经验和结构驱动因素。资助:本研究项目的组成部分由St. Jude儿童研究医院、国家癌症研究所(3POCA021765-44S2)、美国黎巴嫩叙利亚联合慈善机构和Siteman癌症中心资助。本文仅代表作者个人观点,并不代表资助机构的观点。资助机构没有参与本研究的写作或提交。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Stigma measurement in health: a systematic review.

Stigma measurement in health: a systematic review.

Stigma measurement in health: a systematic review.

Stigma measurement in health: a systematic review.

Background: Stigma experienced by individuals with disease is a barrier to health-seeking behaviors and outcomes. Our aim was to systematically review how stigma has been defined and measured and identify gaps in approaches to measurement and intervention.

Methods: A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Databases were searched for stigma measurement in health through July 2024. 8123 citations were screened. Data on definitions, measurement, psychometrics, and interventions were extracted. PROSPERO: CRD42023433176.

Findings: We identified 2267 studies (2605 tools) from 101 countries. 396 (15.2%) tools focused on development and 2369 (91.0%) applied tools. Most tools assessed adults (77.2%). Over 750 stigma tools were identified; many tools were adapted (n = 674) or shortened (n = 446). 117 studies reported effective interventions, primarily in adults. Key gaps included lack of consensus on definitions, limited pediatric-focused research, and insufficient attention to structural drivers of stigma.

Interpretation: This review calls for standardized, context-sensitive stigma measurement and interventions applicable across conditions and settings. Addressing these gaps is crucial to reducing the global burden of stigma and enhancing health outcomes. Future research should focus on unified conceptual approaches and definitions to develop globally adaptable tools and scalable interventions that address both the experiences and structural drivers of stigma.

Funding: Components for the programs involved in this work have been funded by St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, the National Cancer Institute (3POCA021765-44S2), the American Lebanese Syrian Associated Charities, and Siteman Cancer Center. The views in this paper are those of the authors and don't necessarily reflect the funding agencies. The funding agencies were not involved in the writing or submitting of this work.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
EClinicalMedicine
EClinicalMedicine Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
18.90
自引率
1.30%
发文量
506
审稿时长
22 days
期刊介绍: eClinicalMedicine is a gold open-access clinical journal designed to support frontline health professionals in addressing the complex and rapid health transitions affecting societies globally. The journal aims to assist practitioners in overcoming healthcare challenges across diverse communities, spanning diagnosis, treatment, prevention, and health promotion. Integrating disciplines from various specialties and life stages, it seeks to enhance health systems as fundamental institutions within societies. With a forward-thinking approach, eClinicalMedicine aims to redefine the future of healthcare.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信