Explore the vast range of titles available.

Introduction HIV‐related stigma and discrimination continue to hamper efforts to prevent new infections and engage people in HIV treatment, care and support programmes. The identification of effective interventions to reduce stigma and discrimination that can be integrated into national responses is crucial to the success of the global AIDS response. Methods We conducted a systematic review of studies and reports that assessed the effectiveness of interventions to reduce HIV stigma and discrimination between 1 January 2002 and 1 March 2013. Databases searched for peer‐reviewed articles included PubMed, Scopus, EBSCO Host –CINAHL Plus, Psycinfo, Ovid, Sociofile and Popline. Reports were obtained from the www.HIVAIDSClearinghouse.eu, USAID Development Experience Clearinghouse, UNESCO HIV and AIDS Education Clearinghouse, Google, WHO and UNAIDS. Ancestry searches for articles included in the systematic review were also conducted. Studies of any design that sought to reduce stigma as a primary or secondary objective and included pre‐ and post‐intervention measures of stigma were included. Results Of 2368 peer‐reviewed articles and reports identified, 48 were included in our review representing 14 different target populations in 28 countries. The majority of interventions utilized two or more strategies to reduce stigma and discrimination, and ten included structural or biomedical components. However, most interventions targeted a single socio‐ecological level and a single domain of stigma. Outcome measures lacked uniformity and validity, making both interpretation and comparison of study results difficult. While the majority of studies were effective at reducing the aspects of stigma they measured, none assessed the influence of stigma or discrimination reduction on HIV‐related health outcomes. Conclusions Our review revealed considerable progress in the stigma‐reduction field. However, critical challenges and gaps remain which are impeding the identification of effective stigma‐reduction strategies that can be implemented by national governments on a larger scale. The development, validation, and consistent use of globally relevant scales of stigma and discrimination are a critical next step for advancing the field of research in this area. Studies comparing the effectiveness of different stigma‐reduction strategies and studies assessing the influence of stigma reduction on key behavioural and biomedical outcomes are also needed to maximize biomedical prevention efforts.

People with mental illness have long experienced prejudice and discrimination. Researchers have been able to study this phenomenon as stigma and have begun to examine ways of reducing this stigma. Public stigma is the most prominent form observed and studied, as it represents the prejudice and discrimination directed at a group by the larger population. Self-stigma occurs when people internalize these public attitudes and suffer numerous negative consequences as a result. In our article, we more fully define the concept of self-stigma and describe the negative consequences of self-stigma for people with mental illness. We also examine the advantages and disadvantages of disclosure in reducing the impact of stigma. In addition, we argue that a key to challenging self-stigma is to promote personal empowerment. Lastly, we discuss individual- and societal-level methods for reducing self-stigma, programs led by peers as well as those led by social service providers.

Background This realist review was conducted to understand how stigma is reduced in relation to HIV test uptake in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods A systematic search of eight databases resulted in 34 articles considered for synthesis. Data synthesis was guided by a preliminary programme theory and included coding the meaning units to develop themes or intervention pathways that corresponded to context-mechanism-outcome configurations. Results We found that the interventions produced an effect through two pathways: (a) knowledge leads to changes in stigmatizing attitudes and increases in HIV test uptake and (b) knowledge and attitudes lead to changes in stigmatizing behaviours and lead to HIV test uptake. We also found one competing pathway that illustrated the direct impact of knowledge on HIV test uptake without changing stigmatizing attitudes and behaviour. The identified pathways were found to be influenced by some structural factors (e.g., anti-homosexuality laws, country-specific HIV testing programmes and policies), community factors (e.g., traditional beliefs and practices, sexual taboos and prevalence of intimate partner violence) and target-population characteristics (e.g., age, income and urban-rural residence). Conclusions The pathways and underlying mechanisms support the adaptation of intervention strategies in terms of social context and the target population in LMICs.

HIV-related stigma and mistrust contribute to HIV disparities. Addressing stigma with faith partners may be effective, but few church-based stigma reduction interventions have been tested. We implemented a pilot intervention with 3 Latino and 2 African American churches (4 in matched pairs) in high HIV prevalence areas of Los Angeles County to reduce HIV stigma and mistrust and increase HIV testing. The intervention included HIV education and peer leader workshops, pastor-delivered sermons on HIV with imagined contact scenarios, and HIV testing events. We surveyed congregants at baseline and 6 month follow-up (n = 1235) and found statistically significant (p < 0.05) reductions in HIV stigma and mistrust in the Latino intervention churches but not in the African American intervention church nor overall across matched African American and Latino pairs. However, within matched pairs, intervention churches had much higher rates of HIV testing (p < 0.001). Stigma reduction and HIV testing may have synergistic effects in community settings.

Purpose of Review Gambling disorder is among the most stigmatized mental health problems. More research is needed to understand the mechanisms that underlie this stigma and the effects of stigma-reduction interventions. This paper reviews extant literature on the stigma of gambling disorder and highlights evidence from this research and the broader mental illness stigma literature to help advance research on the prevention and reduction of gambling-related stigma. Recent Finding The public stigma of gambling disorder includes stereotypes of affected individuals as “greedy” and “irresponsible,” beliefs that affected individuals are to blame for their problems, and desire to avoid social contact with affected individuals. Stigmatizing attitudes held by the public are often internalized by individuals with gambling disorder, which leads to problem concealment, reduced treatment-seeking, and decreased self-esteem. Women with gambling disorder, as well as those with more severe gambling problems and who perceive greater stigma by the public, are most vulnerable to self-stigma. There is evidence that certain beliefs may underlie the stigmatization of gambling disorder, including beliefs about its causes. Contact- and education-based interventions show efficacy for the reduction of mental illness-related stigma more broadly; additional research is needed to determine the efficacy of various stigma reduction strategies for gambling disorder specifically. Summary Gambling disorder is highly stigmatized relative to other mental health problems, in part because it is viewed as more likely to be caused by controllable factors. Interventions that emphasize the biopsychosocial etiology of gambling disorder may help to prevent and reduce the blame and stigmatization of affected individuals. Structural stigma within domains such as legislation, healthcare, and the gambling industry, interventions to reduce self-stigma, stigma among mental health professionals, and the influence of culture on stigma and its reduction are critical issues for future research.

Stigma surrounding mental health, particularly among men, remains a significant barrier to men engaging with support services for their mental health. Despite increasing evidence of interventions targeting different aspects of stigma reduction, there is a notable gap in the literature concerning male-specific mental health stigma reduction interventions and on the underlying behavior change techniques (BCTs) used to reduce stigma. The purpose of this review is to synthesize the evidence relating to the impact of mental health stigma reduction interventions among men and to explore the underlying BCTs associated with each intervention. The review was restricted to empirical research reporting on interventions targeting mental health stigma in male-dominated populations. The quality appraisal was conducted using the Mixed Methods Analysis Tool and a narrative synthesis was conducted. Fourteen articles reporting on 11 interventions were included for review, while 20 outcome measures were used. Perceived public stigma attracted the largest number of interventions with a lesser focus on self or personal stigma. Nineteen BCTs were identified across the interventions with information about health consequences and self-monitoring of behavior being the most common followed by credible source, social contact, and behavior practice/rehearsal. This is discussed in relation to the wider literature. The methodological issues highlighted in the articles limit the conclusions and recommendations that can be drawn from the review. Recommendations for further research include standardizing the scales used in stigma measurement, in-depth reporting of intervention descriptions, and greater use of theory to guide intervention development.

Background Building partnerships between mental health services and Black faith communities to co-produce culturally tailored interventions is an essential step towards improving access to services and reducing stigma among the Black population. Given that Black faith organisations are considered a primary source of emotional and psychological support they are well positioned as ‘gatekeepers’ for services, to overcome barriers to engagement and build trusting relationships with the Black community. The aim of this paper is to pilot a manualised mental health awareness and stigma reduction intervention for Black faith communities in the UK, and to make an initial assessment of feasibility, acceptability and outcomes. Methods This study employed a mixed methods pre–post-design, based upon the Medical Research Council Framework (MRC) for complex interventions, and the Implementation Science Research Development. Results The qualitative assessments indicate that the intervention was found overall to be acceptable and feasible to the Black faith community population. This pilot study did not find statistically significant changes for the Mental Health Knowledge schedule (MAKS), Reported and Intended Behaviour Scale (RIBS), intended help-seeking or willingness to disclose (Attitudes to Mental Illness Survey) measures. However, the direction of all the non-significant changes in these measures suggests positive changes in mental health knowledge, a reduction in participants’ desire for social distance, and greater willingness to disclose personal experiences of mental health problems. A statistically significant improvement in the Community Attitudes towards Mental Illness (CAMI) scale results indicated a lower level of stigmatising attitudes towards people with lived experience of mental health conditions (PWLE), and an increase in tolerance and support towards PWLE after the intervention. Significant improvement in the willingness to disclose measure suggests increased preparedness to seek help amongst participants, a lesser desire for social distance, and greater willingness to engage with PWLE after the intervention. Three key themes, including 9 subthemes were identified from the qualitative data analysis: (i) initial implementation and intention to adopt; (ii) perceived suitability and usefulness of intervention to address cultural issues relating to mental health in the Black community; and (iii) strengthening the capacity of faith leaders. Conclusions This ON TRAC pilot study shows that the intervention was feasible and acceptable, and that it has promising positive impacts and next requires larger scale evaluation. These results demonstrate that the intervention was a culturally acceptable way to potentially increase mental health awareness and reduce stigma in Black faith communities. Trial registration ISRCTN12253092.

Background/Objectives: Parental weight stigma and bias can shape how parents talk about weight and health with their children, yet their interplay in Romania is unexplored. We examined how parents’ experienced stigma, internalized bias, and explicit antifat attitudes relate to weight- and health-focused conversations with 5–17-year-olds, and whether these links vary by child weight status. Methods: In a cross-sectional survey of 414 Romanian parents, we assessed stigma (teasing/unfair treatment), internalized bias (WBIS-M), antifat attitudes (AFA, UMBFAT), and frequency of health (healthy eating/PA) versus weight-focused talks and comments. BMI-derived child weight status was classified via WHO percentiles. Multivariate regressions and mediation analyses tested predictors and indirect effects. Results: Nearly 80% of parents discussed weight at least sometimes; higher child BMI percentile and parental internalized bias independently predicted more weight conversations (β = 0.44 and β = 0.25, both p < 0.001). Internalized bias mediated the effect of experienced stigma on weight talk (indirect effect = 0.105, 95% CI [0.047, 0.172]). Explicit antifat attitudes drove comments about others’ weight (β = 0.17, p = 0.002). Health-focused talks were unrelated to stigma or bias but were more frequent among parents with higher education, better self-rated health, and lower BMI. Conclusions: Parents’ internalized weight bias—shaped by stigma—fuels weight-focused conversations, especially when children have higher BMI, while antifat attitudes underlie negative comments about others. Interventions should reduce parental internalized bias and train supportive, health-centered communication to curb weight stigma transmission.

Background Beyond the physical symptoms of leprosy, persons affected by leprosy (PAL) continue to face stigma and discrimination, also in the low-endemic setting of Pakistan. Leprosy-related stigma and misinformation impacts treatment adherence and health-seeking behavior of PAL, ultimately increasing risks of disability and increased disease transmission. Healthcare workers (HCW) play a pivotal role in detecting, diagnosing, counseling and supporting PAL. Their insights are essential in developing effective interventions to combat the stigma and improve the overall well-being and confidence in healthcare of those affected. Methods Twenty-one in-depth individual interviews were conducted with dermatologists, dermatology residents, general physicians, leprosy technicians and nurses. A combined inductive-deductive thematic analysis approach was applied based on a “conceptual framework of the dimensions of stigma, its manifestations and impact on health outcomes” developed by Mukerji and Turan. Results The study revealed that stigma and misinformation were shaped by contextual factors, including the absence of a national leprosy program, limited public awareness, patriarchal gender norms and socio-economic disadvantages. HCW reported frequent delays in diagnosis, psychological distress, limited awareness and socio-economic burden due to leprosy and its stigma among PAL. Although HCW demonstrated strong medical knowledge, low levels of leprosy exposure outside specialized centers reduced diagnostic confidence of non-dermatologists. Trust-building, psychosocial counseling and sensitive handling of disclosure proved essential for treatment adherence. Gender dynamics also affected care: women were more likely to hide symptoms due to the anticipated stigma, whereas men were more likely to comprise treatment adherence due to economic responsibilities. Conclusions In low-endemic settings like Pakistan, stigma, misinformation, and structural barriers intersect to drive diagnostic delay and limited access to care. Strengthening leprosy care requires (1) Increasing public awareness and reaching broader audiences through social media and digital health tools (2) collaboration with local and alternative medicine providers to reduce misdiagnosis (3) targeted training for HCW on psychosocial counselling and gender responsive care; and (4) evaluating and improving care interventions through close collaboration with PAL and community leaders. Further, integrating leprosy control into national programs and mental health services would improve comprehensive care and support stigma reduction. Clinical trial number Not applicable.

Introduction Within healthcare settings, HIV‐related stigma is a recognized barrier to access of HIV prevention and treatment services and yet, few efforts have been made to scale‐up stigma reduction programs in service delivery. This is in part due to the lack of a brief, simple, standardized tool for measuring stigma among all levels of health facility staff that works across diverse HIV prevalence, language and healthcare settings. In response, an international consortium led by the Health Policy Project, has developed and field tested a stigma measurement tool for use with health facility staff. Methods Experts participated in a content‐development workshop to review an item pool of existing measures, identify gaps and prioritize questions. The resulting questionnaire was field tested in six diverse sites (China, Dominica, Egypt, Kenya, Puerto Rico and St. Christopher & Nevis). Respondents included clinical and non‐clinical staff. Questionnaires were self‐ or interviewer‐administered. Analysis of item performance across sites examined both psychometric properties and contextual issues. Results The key outcome of the process was a substantially reduced questionnaire. Eighteen core questions measure three programmatically actionable drivers of stigma within health facilities (worry about HIV transmission, attitudes towards people living with HIV (PLHIV), and health facility environment, including policies), and enacted stigma. The questionnaire also includes one short scale for attitudes towards PLHIV (5‐item scale, α = 0.78). Conclusions Stigma‐reduction programmes in healthcare facilities are urgently needed to improve the quality of care provided, uphold the human right to healthcare, increase access to health services, and maximize investments in HIV prevention and treatment. This brief, standardized tool will facilitate inclusion of stigma measurement in research studies and in routine facility data collection, allowing for the monitoring of stigma within healthcare facilities and evaluation of stigma‐reduction programmes. There is potential for wide use of the tool either as a stand‐alone survey or integrated within other studies of health facility staff.