Andrea Ralph1, Catherine Derbyshire. 1. Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychological Therapies, The University of Hull , Hull , UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is known that knowledge and attitudes are important in determining whether society stigmatize and discriminate against specific groups. However, there has been no systematic review of the literature measuring these factors towards acquired brain injury (ABI). OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to systematically evaluate the literature measuring the public's (1) knowledge of ABI and (2) attitudes towards survivors. METHODS: Four databases were searched between December 2011 and March 2012. Studies meeting the selection criteria were included and a manual search of studies' reference lists undertaken to identify any remaining. The quality of studies was assessed using an adapted tool. RESULTS: Twenty studies were reviewed, with quality assessment ratings ranging from 47.83-91.3%. The public lacked awareness of some post-injury symptoms. Misconceptions concerning recovery, memory difficulties and vulnerability to second injuries were also commonly endorsed. The public demonstrated more negative attitudes towards survivors of ABI than those with other injuries, particularly if they deemed the individual responsible for their ABI. CONCLUSIONS: Survivors of ABI are vulnerable to stigma and discrimination. It is therefore essential that Government and media campaigns prioritize educating the public about ABI and promote the inclusion of survivors.
BACKGROUND: It is known that knowledge and attitudes are important in determining whether society stigmatize and discriminate against specific groups. However, there has been no systematic review of the literature measuring these factors towards acquired brain injury (ABI). OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to systematically evaluate the literature measuring the public's (1) knowledge of ABI and (2) attitudes towards survivors. METHODS: Four databases were searched between December 2011 and March 2012. Studies meeting the selection criteria were included and a manual search of studies' reference lists undertaken to identify any remaining. The quality of studies was assessed using an adapted tool. RESULTS: Twenty studies were reviewed, with quality assessment ratings ranging from 47.83-91.3%. The public lacked awareness of some post-injury symptoms. Misconceptions concerning recovery, memory difficulties and vulnerability to second injuries were also commonly endorsed. The public demonstrated more negative attitudes towards survivors of ABI than those with other injuries, particularly if they deemed the individual responsible for their ABI. CONCLUSIONS: Survivors of ABI are vulnerable to stigma and discrimination. It is therefore essential that Government and media campaigns prioritize educating the public about ABI and promote the inclusion of survivors.