Cited by 60Schizophrenia research and treatmentMental Health and PsychiatryMental Health Treatment and Access

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 58 of the 58 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Is Living With Psychosis Demoralizing?: Insight, Self-stigma, and Clinical Outcome Among People With Schizophrenia Across 1 Year

Open access
Cavelti, Marialuisa, Rüsch, Nicolas, Vauth, Roland·2014·Journal of Nervous & Mental Disease

Abstract

Lack of insight is a major target in the treatment of schizophrenia. However, insight may have undesirable effects on self-concept and motivation that can hinder recovery. This study aimed to examine the link between insight, self-stigma, and demoralization as predictors of symptoms and functioning. Insight, self-stigma, depressive and psychotic symptoms, and functioning were assessed among 133 outpatients with schizophrenia at baseline and 12 months later. The data were analyzed by hierarchical multiple linear regressions. More insight at baseline and an increase in self-stigma over 12 months predicted more demoralization at follow-up. Insight at baseline was not associated with any outcome variable, but self-stigma at baseline was related to poorer functioning and more positive symptoms at follow-up. More demoralization at baseline predicted poorer functioning 12 months later. Demoralization did not mediate the relationship between self-stigma at baseline and functioning after 1 year. Given the decisive role of self-stigma regarding recovery from schizophrenia, dysfunctional beliefs related to illness and the self should be addressed in treatment. Different psychotherapeutical approaches are discussed.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/nmd.0000000000000160

Cites

58 of 58 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 60

Metadata

Authors
Cavelti, M., Rüsch, N., & Vauth, R.
Affiliations
Universität Ulm (DE)
Corresponding author
Cavelti, Marialuisa
Venue
Journal of Nervous & Mental Disease
Published
2014-07
Volume
202
Issue
7
Pages
521-529
ISSN
0022-3018 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2029059351
Cited by
60
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 5
FWCI
5.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • BORIS (University Library Bern) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Open Access CRIS of the University of Bern
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung (120673)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Mental Health and Psychiatry
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
schizophrenia, insight, self-stigma, demoralization, self-concept, motivation, functioning, depressive symptoms, psychotic symptoms, recovery, psychotherapy
MeSH terms
Adult, Depression, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Male, Middle Aged, Morale, Predictive Value of Tests, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychotic Disorders, Schizophrenia, Schizophrenic Psychology, Self Concept, Time Factors, Social Stigma, Patient Outcome Assessment

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