Cited by 87Mental Health Treatment and AccessSchizophrenia research and treatmentPsychology and Mental Health

Should we be concerned about stigma and discrimination in people at risk for psychosis? A systematic review

Open access
Colizzi, Marco, Ruggeri, Mirella, Lasalvia, Antonio·2020·Psychological Medicine

Abstract

Background: Previous studies have provided initial evidence that people at risk for psychosis (PR) suffer from stigma and discrimination related to their condition. However, no study has systematically reviewed stigma and discrimination associated with being at PR and the potential underlying mechanisms. Methods: This work aimed to systematically review all studies addressing stigma and discrimination in PR people in order to assess: (1) the occurrence of this phenomenon and its different components (public, internalized, perceived, and labeling-related), (2) whether stigma affects outcomes of the PR state, and (3) whether other factors modulate stigma among PR individuals. Results: The reviewed studies ( n = 38) widely differ in their design, methodological quality, and populations under investigation, thus limiting direct comparison of findings. However, converging evidence suggests that the general public endorses stigmatizing attitudes towards PR individuals, and that this is more frequent in people with a low educational level or with no direct experience of the PR state. PR individuals experience more internalized stigma and perceive more discrimination than healthy subjects or patients with non-psychotic disorders. Further, PR labeling is equally associated with both positive (e.g. validation and relief) and negative effects (e.g. status loss and discrimination). Moreover, stigma increases the likelihood of poor outcome, transition to full-psychosis, disengagement from services, and family stigma among PR individuals. Finally, very limited evidence awaiting replication supports the efficacy of cognitive therapies in mitigating the negative effects of stigma. Conclusions: Evidence confirms previous concerns about stigma and its negative consequences for PR individuals, thus having important public health implications.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0033291720000148

Cites

60 of 60 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. WHO (2001). TheWorld health report: 2001. Mental health: new understand- ing, new hope. In (pp. 1-169). Geneva: World Health Organization.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Colizzi, M., Ruggeri, M., & Lasalvia, A.
Affiliations
University of Verona (IT)
Corresponding author
Colizzi, Marco
Venue
Psychological Medicine
Published
2020-02-17
Volume
50
Issue
5
Pages
705-726
ISSN
  • 0033-2917 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8978
OpenAlex
W3008132719
Cited by
86
References
59
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 3
FWCI
1.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychological Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Institutional Research Information System (University of Udine) (submittedVersion)
  • Iris (University of Trento) (submittedVersion)
  • INFM-OAR (INFN Catania) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychology and Mental Health
Keywords
psychosis risk, stigma, discrimination, self-stigma, public stigma, labeling, family stigma, transition to psychosis, cognitive therapy, educational attainment
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Child, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Psychotic Disorders, Stereotyping, Young Adult, 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