Cited by 432Mental Health Treatment and AccessPsychology and Mental HealthGender Roles and Identity Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 74 of the 75 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 67 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Stigma and discrimination limit access to mental health care

Open access
Thornicroft, Graham·2008·Epidemiologia e Psichiatria Sociale

Abstract

This editorial provides an overview of how far access to mental health care is limited by perceptions of stigma and anticipated discrimination. Globally over 70% of young people and adults with mental illness receive no treatment from healthcare staff. The rates of non-treatment are far higher in low income countries. Evidence from some descriptive studies and epidemiological surveys suggest that potent factors increasing the likelihood of treatment avoidance, or long delays before presenting for care include: (i) lack of knowledge about the features and treatability of mental illnesses; (ii) ignorance about how to access assessment and treatment; (iii) prejudice against people who have mental illness, and (iv) expectations of discrimination against people who have a diagnosis of mental illness. The associations between low rates of help seeking, and stigma and discrimination are as yet poorly understood and require more careful characterisation and analysis, providing the platform for more effective action to ensure that a greater proportion of people with mental illness are effectively treated in future.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This editorial argues that stigma and discrimination are major barriers to mental health care, with most people with mental illness untreated worldwide. It synthesizes evidence on treatment gaps, help-seeking delays, and disadvantaged groups, concluding that the links between low help seeking and stigma/discrimination remain poorly understood.

Key findings

  • Globally over 70% of young people and adults with mental illness receive no treatment from healthcare staff; in the USA 31% are affected annually but 67% are untreated, in Europe 27% are affected and 74% receive no treatment, and in Nigeria only 1.6% received mental health care over 12 months. A WHO overview of 37 studies found untreated proportions of 32.2% for schizophrenia, 56.3% for depression, 56.0% for dysthymia, 50.2% for bipolar disorder, 55.9% for panic disorder, 57.5% for generalised anxiety disorder, 57.3% for obsessive compulsive disorder, and 78.1% for alcohol abuse and dependence.
  • Help seeking is often delayed: after clear-cut signs of a psychotic disorder, it takes on average over a year to first receive assessment and treatment; in a US survey of almost 10,000 adults, average delays were 8 years for mood disorders and at least 9 years for anxiety disorders. Only 41% of people with mental illness in the previous year had received any treatment, and a quarter first went to a member of the clergy (31% in the 1950s and 24% in the 1990s), more than went first to a psychiatrist (17%) or general medical practitioner (17%).
  • Stigma and anticipated discrimination reduce help seeking: in a survey of over 3000 US military staff after combat duty in Iraq or Afghanistan, 60–77% of unwell soldiers did not seek mental health care, largely related to concerns about stigmatisation. In rural Virginia, over a third of residents had a diagnosed mental disorder but only 6% sought help; African Americans receive mental health care about half as often as white people.
  • Stigma is described as an amalgamation of ignorance/misinformation, prejudice, and discrimination, with rejection and avoidance of people with mental illness appearing universal; no known country, society, or culture considers people with a mental illness diagnosis to have the same value and acceptability as those without.

Methods

  • Design: editorial overview, not primary research; it synthesizes descriptive studies, epidemiological surveys, and prior reviews to examine how stigma and discrimination limit access to mental health care.
  • Data/sample: no primary dataset; evidence includes a WHO overview of 37 studies, a US national survey of almost 10,000 adults, a survey of over 3000 military staff, and other cited studies from multiple countries.
  • Main analysis: narrative synthesis of treatment rates, help-seeking delays, pathways to care, and stigma/discrimination factors, with illustrative quotations and examples.

Limitations

  • The paper states that the associations between low rates of help seeking and stigma/discrimination are “as yet poorly understood and require more careful characterisation and analysis”; it also states that the quality of information is relatively poor, with very few comparative studies between countries or over time, and that rural evidence is patchy.
  • Evident from the text: as an editorial, it does not describe a systematic search strategy, inclusion criteria, or quantitative synthesis, so its conclusions rely on selected cited studies and examples rather than a formal systematic review.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s1121189x00002621

Cites

74 of 74 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

46 Not checked yet · 4 No basis given · 2 Own interpretation

Verify all 67 references — free account

Show all 25 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 26
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 2
27 of 27
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    There is no known country, society or culture in which people with mental illness with a diagnosis are considered to have the same value and to be as acceptable as people who do not have mental illness.

    “Indeed there is no known country, society or culture in which people with mental illness with a diagnosis are considered to have the same value and to be as acceptable as people who do not have mental illness.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The core experiences of shame and blame are common everywhere stigma has been studied, but to differing extents.

    “The core experiences of shame (to oneself and one's family) and blame (from others) are common everywhere stigma has been studied, but to differing extents.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Rejection and avoidance of people with a diagnosis of mental illness appear to be a universal phenomenon.

    “Finally, rejection and avoidance of people with a diagnosis of mental illness appear to be universal phenomenon”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    A strong reluctance to be seen as mentally ill appears to be a universal phenomenon.

    “A strong reluctance to be seen as mentally ill appears to be a universal phenomenon.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Most people of all cultures have relatively little accurate and useful knowledge about mental illness.

    “There is an important general point here: that most people of all cultures have relatively little accurate and useful knowledge about mental illness.”
5 of 5

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.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

1 of 1

Citations

Cites

Show all 75 references

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. 2003, Inside Outside: Improving Mental Health Services for Black and Minority Ethnic Communities in England
  2. Thornicroft, 2006, Actions Speak Louder: Tackling Discrimination against People with Mental Illness
  3. 10.1176/appi.ajp.161.9.1626 · DOI
  4. 10.1056/nejmsa043266 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Davis, 2004, A conceptual model of barriers to mental health services among African Americans, African American Research Perspectives, 10, 44

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 431

Metadata

Authors
Thornicroft, G.
Affiliations
King's College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Thornicroft, Graham
Venue
Epidemiologia e Psichiatria Sociale
Published
2008-03
Volume
17
Issue
1
Pages
14-19
ISSN
  • 1121-189X (ISSN-L)
  • 2038-1816
OpenAlex
W1986958797
Cited by
432
References
75
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 34 · 2024: 40 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 41 · 2021: 41 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 38 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Epidemiologia e Psichiatria Sociale (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (NF-SI-0611-10053)
  • University of Oxford
  • H. Lundbeck A/S
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychology and Mental Health
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender Roles and Identity Studies
Keywords
mental health stigma, discrimination, access to mental health care, help-seeking, treatment avoidance, low-income countries, mental health service utilization, prejudice
MeSH terms
Mental Disorders, Health Services Accessibility, Humans, Mental Health Services, Stereotyping

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-09, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-09 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

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