Department of Global Health, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington, Campus Mailbox 357965, Harris Hydraulics Building, 1705 NE Pacific Street, Seattle, WA, 98195-7175, USA.
Department of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
BMC Med. 2019 Feb 15;17(1):41. doi: 10.1186/s12916-018-1244-y.
Researchers have long recognized that stigma is a global, multi-level phenomenon requiring intervention approaches that target multiple levels including individual, interpersonal, community, and structural levels. While existing interventions have produced modest reductions in stigma, their full reach and impact remain limited by a nearly exclusive focus targeting only one level of analysis.
We conducted the first systematic review of original research on multi-level stigma-reduction interventions. We used the following eligibility criteria for inclusion: (1) peer-reviewed, (2) contained original research, (3) published prior to initiation of search on November 30, 2017, (4) evaluated interventions that operated on more than one level, and (5) examined stigma as an outcome. We stratified and analyzed articles by several domains, including whether the research was conducted in a low-, middle-, or high-income country.
Twenty-four articles met the inclusion criteria. The articles included a range of countries (low, middle, and high income), stigmatized conditions/populations (e.g., HIV, mental health, leprosy), intervention targets (e.g., people living with a stigmatized condition, health care workers, family, and community members), and stigma reduction strategies (e.g., contact, social marketing, counseling, faith, problem solving), with most using education-based approaches. A total of 12 (50%) articles examined community-level interventions alongside interpersonal and/or intrapersonal levels, but only 1 (4%) combined a structural-level intervention with another level. Of the 24 studies, only 6 (25%) were randomized controlled trials. While most studies (17 of 24) reported statistically significant declines in at least one measure of stigma, fewer than half reported measures of practical significance (i.e., effect size); those that were reported varied widely in magnitude and were typically in the small-to-moderate range.
While there has been progress over the past decade in the development and evaluation of multi-level stigma interventions, much work remains to strengthen and expand this approach. We highlight several opportunities for new research and program development.
研究人员早就认识到,污名是一种全球性的、多层次的现象,需要采取干预措施,针对个人、人际、社区和结构等多个层面。虽然现有的干预措施已经在减少污名方面取得了一定成效,但由于几乎完全专注于单一层面的分析,其全面影响仍然有限。
我们对减少多层次污名的干预措施进行了首次系统综述。我们使用以下纳入标准:(1)同行评议,(2)包含原始研究,(3)在 2017 年 11 月 30 日开始搜索之前发表,(4)评估在多个层面上运作的干预措施,以及(5)将污名作为结果进行检验。我们根据几个领域对文章进行分层和分析,包括研究是在低收入、中等收入还是高收入国家进行的。
24 篇文章符合纳入标准。这些文章涵盖了一系列国家(低收入、中等收入和高收入)、污名化的条件/人群(例如,艾滋病毒、心理健康、麻风病)、干预目标(例如,患有污名化疾病的人、卫生保健工作者、家庭和社区成员)和减少污名的策略(例如,接触、社会营销、咨询、信仰、解决问题),其中大多数使用基于教育的方法。共有 12 篇(50%)文章同时研究了社区层面的干预措施以及人际和/或个体层面的干预措施,但只有 1 篇(4%)将结构层面的干预措施与另一个层面结合起来。在 24 项研究中,只有 6 项(25%)是随机对照试验。虽然大多数研究(24 项研究中的 17 项)报告了至少一项污名指标的统计学显著下降,但不到一半的研究报告了实际意义上的指标(即效应量);那些报告的指标在数量上差异很大,通常在小到中等范围。
虽然在过去十年中,在开发和评估多层次污名干预措施方面已经取得了进展,但仍有许多工作需要加强和扩展这种方法。我们强调了一些新的研究和方案发展的机会。