Cited by 402Mental Health Treatment and AccessSuicide and Self-Harm StudiesGender Roles and Identity Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 87 of the 90 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Stigma as a Barrier to Seeking Health Care Among Military Personnel With Mental Health Problems

Open access

Abstract

Approximately 60% of military personnel who experience mental health problems do not seek help, yet many of them could benefit from professional treatment. Across military studies, one of the most frequently reported barriers to help-seeking for mental health problems is concerns about stigma. It is, however, less clear how stigma influences mental health service utilization. This review will synthesize existing research on stigma, focusing on those in the military with mental health problems. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies between 2001 and 2014 to examine the prevalence of stigma for seeking help for a mental health problem and its association with help-seeking intentions/mental health service utilization. Twenty papers met the search criteria. Weighted prevalence estimates for the 2 most endorsed stigma concerns were 44.2% (95% confidence interval: 37.1, 51.4) for "My unit leadership might treat me differently" and 42.9% (95% confidence interval: 36.8, 49.0) for "I would be seen as weak." Nine studies found no association between anticipated stigma and help-seeking intentions/mental health service use and 4 studies found a positive association. One study found a negative association between self-stigma and intentions to seek help. Counterintuitively, those that endorsed high anticipated stigma still utilized mental health services or were interested in seeking help. We propose that these findings may be related to intention-behavior gaps or methodological issues in the measurement of stigma. Positive associations may be influenced by modified labeling theory. Additionally, other factors such as self-stigma and negative attitudes toward mental health care may be worth further attention in future investigation.

Overview

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 · 10.1093/epirev/mxu012

Cites

87 of 87 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 90 references

3 of the 90 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Kim, 2010, Psychiatric Services, 61, 582, 10.1176/appi.ps.61.6.582 · DOI
  2. Pietrzak, 2009, Psychiatric Services, 60, 1118, 10.1176/appi.ps.60.8.1118 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Vogt, 2011, Psychiatric Services, 62, 135, 10.1176/appi.ps.62.2.135 · DOI · Paper page
  4. 2013, J PSYCHOL PSYCHOTHER, 35, 129
  5. Gorman, 2011, Psychiatric Services, 62, 28, 10.1176/appi.ps.62.1.28 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–300 of 401

Metadata

Authors
Sharp, M.-L., Fear, N. T., Rona, R. J., Wessely, S., Greenberg, N., Jones, N., & Goodwin, L.
Affiliations
King's College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Sharp, M.-L.
Venue
Epidemiologic Reviews
Published
2015-01-01
Volume
37
Issue
1
Pages
144-162
ISSN
  • 0193-936X (ISSN-L)
  • 1478-6729
OpenAlex
W2167714940
Cited by
402
References
90
Citations by year
2026: 37 · 2025: 40 · 2024: 30 · 2023: 58 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 39 · 2020: 37 · 2019: 41 · 2018: 35 · 2017: 29 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 6
FWCI
4.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Epidemiologic Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Lancaster EPrints (Lancaster University) (submittedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
  • University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Defense
  • Royal British Legion
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (NF-SI-0512-10003)
  • King's College London
  • Economic and Social Research Council (1254620)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Suicide and Self-Harm Studies
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender Roles and Identity Studies
Keywords
mental health stigma, help-seeking, military personnel, mental health service utilization, anticipated stigma, self-stigma, help-seeking intentions, intention-behavior gap, labeling theory, stigma prevalence
MeSH terms
Australia, Mental Disorders, United Kingdom, Humans, Military Personnel, New Zealand, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, United States, 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