Stigma toward individuals with mental disorders among Brazilian psychiatrists: a latent class analysis

0Citations
Citations of this article
47Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The stigma toward individuals with mental disorders is highly prevalent, not only in the general population but among health care providers as well. The aim of this study was to identify subgroups based on stigmatizing beliefs related to psychiatric disorders among Brazilian psychiatrists, as well as to investigate their association with clinical and personality characteristics. METHODS: Latent cluster analysis was used to find subgroups of cases in multivariate data according to a psychotic (schizophrenia) and a nonpsychotic disorder (attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder). The clusters for each psychiatric disorder were compared according to sociodemographic, emotional traits, and personality characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 779 psychiatrists answered the questionnaire. Three different subgroups of stigma levels were identified regarding schizophrenia: the highest (n=202 [51.7%]), intermediate (108 [27.6%]), and the lowest (81 [20.7%]). Participants from the highest stigma group had a significantly longer time since graduation, higher anxiety-state scores, and lower positive affect. Two subgroups were identified with respect to attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, although there were no differences between them in sociodemographic or clinical variables. CONCLUSION: There were more subgroups of stigmatizing beliefs regarding psychotic disorders. Individual characteristics, such as those related to trait anxiety and affect, can be associated with high stigma toward schizophrenia.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

da Silva, A. G., Loch, A. A., Leal, V. P., da Silva, P. R., Rosa, M. M., Bomfim, O. da C., … Palha, A. P. (2021). Stigma toward individuals with mental disorders among Brazilian psychiatrists: a latent class analysis. Revista Brasileira de Psiquiatria (Sao Paulo, Brazil : 1999), 43(3), 262–268. https://doi.org/10.1590/1516-4446-2020-0864

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free