Influence of Health Beliefs and Stigma on Choosing Internet Support Groups Over Formal Mental Health Services
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: As the Internet has become a ubiquitous tool for health information, the use of Internet support groups for mental health concerns has grown. Despite the widespread use of these groups, little research has examined the efficacy and effectiveness of online communities for ameliorating mental health symptoms or factors that prompt people to seek online support rather than formal treatment. Our study addresses this gap in the literature by investigating Internet support group use as an alternative to formal mental health services. METHODS: Logistic regression was conducted with data from the 2008 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) to examine relationships among treatment beliefs, practical variables such as time and affordability, stigma, and use of Internet support groups among 2,532 survey participants who reported a need for mental health treatment but were not receiving formal services. RESULTS: Four significant predictors of Internet support group use emerged: fear of being hospitalized or taking medication (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]=8.81, 95% confidence interval [CI]=4.25-18.27), inadequate insurance coverage (AOR=3.22, CI=1.44-7.20), age 26-34 years (AOR=.22, CI=.07-.69), and age 35 or older (AOR=.21, CI=.08-.56). CONCLUSIONS: Fear of coercion and the costs of traditional mental health services were important predictors of Internet support group use. The finding that inadequate insurance coverage prompted people to seek Internet support aligns with a substantial literature regarding lack of financial resources and reduced access to treatment. Individuals' fears of hospitalization and of taking medication suggested that they may view formal treatment as potentially coercive. Further work is needed to decrease public stigma regarding mental health services and the conditions under which involuntary treatment occurs.
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?
People who refuse to seek out traditional services, especially those who wish to remain anonymous, may use technology-based mental health services.
“Furthermore, people who refuse to seek out traditional services, especially those who wish to remain anonymous, may use technology-based mental health services.18”
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 55 · Cited by 52
- Authors
- Townsend, L., Gearing, R. E., & Polyanskaya, O.
- Affiliations
- Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (US)
- Venue
- Psychiatric Services
- Published
- 2012-04
- Volume
- 63
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 370-376
- ISSN
- 0022-1597 (ISSN-L)
- 1075-2730
- 1557-9700
- OpenAlex
- W2002990846
- Cited by
- 52
- References
- 55
- Citations by year
- 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 3 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 6.81
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Psychiatric Services (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Literacy and Information Accessibility
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
- Keywords
- online support groups, online mental health communities, help-seeking, mental health stigma, fear of hospitalization, treatment affordability, barriers to mental health care, National Survey on Drug Use and Health
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Mental Disorders, Coercion, Fear, Female, Health Services Accessibility, Humans, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Male, Mental Health Services, Psychotropic Drugs, Self-Help Groups, Logistic Models, Insurance Coverage, Internet, Young Adult, Patient Preference, 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