Insight and attitudes towards medication among inpatients with chronic schizophrenia in the US and China
Abstract
Background The impact of culture on insight on illness and attitudes towards medication among patients with schizophrenia has not been well studied. We compared inpatients in the US and in China (a culture that numerous studies have shown heavily stigmatizes mental illness and psychosis), on measures of insight and acceptance of medication, controlling for overall severity of schizophrenia symptoms.Methods Clinical antipsychotic treatment for intervention effectiveness (CATIE) was a large study of pharmacotherapy of people with schizophrenia across the US. Insight was measured using the insight and treatment attitudes questionnaire (ITAQ) and attitudes towards medication by the drug attitude inventory (DAI) and symptoms of schizophrenia by the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS). These measures were applied to a sample of hospitalized patients diagnosed with schizophrenia at the Guangzhou Psychiatric hospital, the largest psychiatric hospital in Southern China. Mean ITAQ and DAI scores, net of total schizophrenia symptoms and other differences were compared at the time of admission using analysis of covariance.Results Both insight and favourable attitudes towards medication were significantly and substantially lower in the sample from Guangzhou on bivariate analysis even after adjusting for severity of overall schizophrenia symptoms on the PANSS.Conclusion Inpatients in China had far lower scores on measures of insight and acceptance of their need for and benefits of medication, controlling for overall severity of schizophrenia symptoms, suggesting a significant impact of Chinese culture which is presumed to more heavily stigmatize mental illness and especially psychosis, although other explanations can not be ruled out.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Clinical insight varies by cultural background.
“Clinical insight has been found to vary by cultural background 155,156 .”
From Insight in schizophrenia spectrum disorders: relationship with behavior, mood and perceived quality of life, underlying causes and emerging treatments (2018) · cites this paper as [156]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 25 · Cited by 26
- Authors
- Mohamed, S., Rosenheck, R., He, H., & Yuping, N.
- Affiliations
- Yale University (US)
- Guangzhou Psychiatric Hospital (CN)
- Corresponding author
- Mohamed, Somaia
- Venue
- Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology
- Published
- 2014-02-19
- Volume
- 49
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1063-1070
- ISSN
- 0933-7954 (ISSN-L)
- 1433-9285
- OpenAlex
- W2044979734
- Cited by
- 26
- References
- 25
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 1
- FWCI
- 2.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Mental Health and Psychiatry
- Keywords
- schizophrenia, insight into illness, attitudes toward medication, drug acceptance, cultural factors, mental health stigma, hospitalized patients, cross-cultural comparison, China, United States, CATIE
- MeSH terms
- China, Chronic Disease, Female, Hospitalization, Hospitals, Psychiatric, Humans, Inpatients, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Male, Surveys and Questionnaires, Schizophrenia, Schizophrenic Psychology, Antipsychotic Agents, United States, Treatment Outcome, Social Stigma
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review