P C Gronholm1, M Nosé2, W H van Brakel3, J Eaton4, B Ebenso5, K Fiekert6, M Milenova1, C Sunkel7, C Barbui2, G Thornicroft1. 1. Health Service and Population Research Department, Centre for Global Mental Health and Centre for Implementation Science, Institute of Psychology, Psychiatry & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK. 2. WHO Collaborating Centre for Research and Training in Mental Health and Service Evaluation; Department of Neuroscience, Biomedicine and Movement Sciences; Section of Psychiatry, University of Verona, Verona, Italy. 3. NLR International, Amsterdam, Netherlands. 4. CBM Global, and Centre for Global Mental Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London, UK. 5. Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK. 6. KNCV Tuberculosis Foundation, The Hague, Netherlands. 7. Global Mental Health Peer Network, Johannesburg, Gauteng, South Africa.
Abstract
AIMS: To develop recommendations for strategies and interventions to reduce stigma and discrimination related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), through reviewing and synthesising evidence in relation to COVID-19 and other disease outbreaks and infectious/stigmatised conditions from systematic reviews and primary studies and recommendations from additional materials. METHODS: Rapid review, drawing on the World Health Organization's (WHO) methodology for developing interim guidelines during health emergencies. PubMed/MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central and Campbell Collaboration searched up to mid-April 2020. Searches were supplemented by reference-searching and expert recommendations. Searches were designed to identify: (1) systematic reviews (<10 years), or (2) primary intervention studies (no date limit) reporting evidence on anti-stigma interventions (in relation to COVID-19 or other infectious/stigmatised conditions) or (3) additional relevant materials. Data were extracted on population, intervention, outcome and results. These data were compiled into evidence summary tables and narrative overviews. Recommendations on strategies for COVID-19 stigma-reduction were developed using the WHO 'Evidence to Decision' framework approach. The review protocol was registered with PROSPERO (registration ID: CRD42020177677). RESULTS: The searches identified a total of 4150 potentially relevant records, from which 12 systematic reviews and 29 additional articles were included. Overarching considerations and specific recommendations focus on: (1) language/words used in relation to COVID-19 and affected people; (2) media/journalistic practices; (3) public health interventions; (4) targeted public health interventions for key groups and (5) involving communities and key stakeholders. CONCLUSIONS: These recommendations represent the first consolidated evidence-based guidance on stigma and discrimination reduction in relation to COVID-19. Mitigating the impact of stigma is critical in reducing distress and negative experiences, and strengthening communities' resolve to work together during exceptional circumstances. Ultimately, reducing stigma helps addressing structural inequalities that drive marginalisation and exacerbate both health risks and the impact of stigma. Administrations and decision makers are urged to consider integrating these recommendations into the ongoing COVID-19 response.
AIMS: To develop recommendations for strategies and interventions to reduce stigma and discrimination related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), through reviewing and synthesising evidence in relation to COVID-19 and other disease outbreaks and infectious/stigmatised conditions from systematic reviews and primary studies and recommendations from additional materials. METHODS: Rapid review, drawing on the World Health Organization's (WHO) methodology for developing interim guidelines during health emergencies. PubMed/MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central and Campbell Collaboration searched up to mid-April 2020. Searches were supplemented by reference-searching and expert recommendations. Searches were designed to identify: (1) systematic reviews (<10 years), or (2) primary intervention studies (no date limit) reporting evidence on anti-stigma interventions (in relation to COVID-19 or other infectious/stigmatised conditions) or (3) additional relevant materials. Data were extracted on population, intervention, outcome and results. These data were compiled into evidence summary tables and narrative overviews. Recommendations on strategies for COVID-19 stigma-reduction were developed using the WHO 'Evidence to Decision' framework approach. The review protocol was registered with PROSPERO (registration ID: CRD42020177677). RESULTS: The searches identified a total of 4150 potentially relevant records, from which 12 systematic reviews and 29 additional articles were included. Overarching considerations and specific recommendations focus on: (1) language/words used in relation to COVID-19 and affected people; (2) media/journalistic practices; (3) public health interventions; (4) targeted public health interventions for key groups and (5) involving communities and key stakeholders. CONCLUSIONS: These recommendations represent the first consolidated evidence-based guidance on stigma and discrimination reduction in relation to COVID-19. Mitigating the impact of stigma is critical in reducing distress and negative experiences, and strengthening communities' resolve to work together during exceptional circumstances. Ultimately, reducing stigma helps addressing structural inequalities that drive marginalisation and exacerbate both health risks and the impact of stigma. Administrations and decision makers are urged to consider integrating these recommendations into the ongoing COVID-19 response.
Entities:
Keywords:
Coronavirus; emergency response; health inequalities; public health
Authors: Tine Van Bortel; Anoma Basnayake; Fatou Wurie; Musu Jambai; Alimamy Sultan Koroma; Andrew T Muana; Katrina Hann; Julian Eaton; Steven Martin; Laura B Nellums Journal: Bull World Health Organ Date: 2016-01-21 Impact factor: 9.408
Authors: Wim H van Brakel; Janine Cataldo; Sandeep Grover; Brandon A Kohrt; Laura Nyblade; Melissa Stockton; Edwin Wouters; Lawrence H Yang Journal: BMC Med Date: 2019-02-15 Impact factor: 8.775
Authors: Sabine E Hanisch; Conal D Twomey; Andrew C H Szeto; Ulrich W Birner; Dennis Nowak; Carla Sabariego Journal: BMC Psychiatry Date: 2016-01-06 Impact factor: 3.630
Authors: Emily A Holmes; Rory C O'Connor; V Hugh Perry; Irene Tracey; Simon Wessely; Louise Arseneault; Clive Ballard; Helen Christensen; Roxane Cohen Silver; Ian Everall; Tamsin Ford; Ann John; Thomas Kabir; Kate King; Ira Madan; Susan Michie; Andrew K Przybylski; Roz Shafran; Angela Sweeney; Carol M Worthman; Lucy Yardley; Katherine Cowan; Claire Cope; Matthew Hotopf; Ed Bullmore Journal: Lancet Psychiatry Date: 2020-04-15 Impact factor: 27.083
Authors: Amani R Holder-Dixon; Olivia R Adams; Tianna L Cobb; Alison J Goldberg; Rachel A Fikslin; Mora A Reinka; Amanda N Gesselman; Devon M Price Journal: J Behav Med Date: 2022-06-10
Authors: Nicola Di Fazio; Donato Morena; Giuseppe Delogu; Gianpietro Volonnino; Federico Manetti; Martina Padovano; Matteo Scopetti; Paola Frati; Vittorio Fineschi Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-07-30 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Makoto Tsukuda; Yoshiyasu Ito; Keisuke Nojima; Tomonori Kayano; Junko Honda Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-08-05 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Yuna Koyama; Nobutoshi Nawa; Yui Yamaoka; Hisaaki Nishimura; Jin Kuramochi; Takeo Fujiwara Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-07-25 Impact factor: 4.614