Summary Although the deleterious effects of obesity have been well documented in terms of morbidity and mortality, less is known about what it is like to live with this complex and chronic disease. This study systematically reviewed and synthesized peer‐reviewed studies relating to the lived experience of patients with obesity. A total of 12,388 records were screened, resulting in the inclusion of 32 final studies. Meta‐ethnographic synthesis of these 32 studies generated five “third‐order constructs” or themes: the development of obesity; a life limited; stigma, judgment, shame, and blame; treatment and; experiences of specific or minority groups. These constructs describe, from the patient's perspective, the factors associated with the development and maintenance of obesity; the effects of the disease on their day‐to‐day lives; the impact of the stigma and judgment many patients are subjected to; and their experience of accessing, or trying to access, treatment for their healthcare needs. This synthesis reveals the dearth of studies that focus solely on the experience of the patient and highlights the tendency for participant‐informed, rather than participatory, methods in obesity research. It concludes with a call for further participatory research into the experiences of people living with obesity.

No abstract

Considerable research has been undertaken regarding the mental health inequalities experienced by lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI+) youth as a consequence of societal and individual prejudice, stigma and discrimination. Far less research has focussed on protective factors that promote wellbeing for this population. A scoping review was conducted using a six-stage methodological framework, and is reported in accordance with the PRISMA-ScR statement. This explored the extent, range and nature of the peer-reviewed, published, academic literature on what is known about the protective factors that promote LGBTI+ youth wellbeing. Six databases were systematically searched applying Population–Concept–Context key inclusion criteria, complemented by contact with authors to identify additional sources, reference checks and hand searches. Ninety-six individual research records were identified and analysed, drawing from Honneth’s Recognition Theory. Interpersonal relations with parents (n = 40), peers (n = 32) and providers (n = 22) were associated with indicators of enhanced wellbeing, as were LGBTI+ community relations (n = 32). Importantly, online (n = 10), faith (n = 10) and cultural (n = 5) communities were potentially protective. Content and thematic analysis highlighted the importance of Gay–Straight Alliances (GSAs) (n = 23) offering powerful protective opportunities through intersecting interpersonal, community and legal forms of recognition. GSAs enhance allyship by peers and providers (n = 21), facilitate access to LGBTI+ community networks (n = 11) and co-exist alongside inclusive policies (n = 12), curricular (n = 5) and extracurricular activities (n = 1). This scoping review underscores the need to move beyond the predominant focus on risk factors for LGBTI+ youth, which subsequently inform protectionist approaches. It concludes with an appeal to develop mechanisms to apply recognitive justice to policy, practice and, importantly, future research directions. This emphasises the salience of enhanced understandings of inclusion, which is rights-based, universally available and of potential benefit to all.

This article addresses emic and etic perspectives on two Mexican folk illnesses, susto and mal de ojo. The approaches of Mexican and Mexican American mothers to treating these illnesses in their own children are compared and contrasted to those stated by physicians in a local clinic. The physicians considered the vast majority of the sets of symptoms given for these folk illnesses to be worthy of medical attention and possibly life threatening if not treated. While folk illness diagnoses may not exactly label biomedical “diseases,” the folk diagnoses do indicate life‐threatening conditions to which biomedical healers should be sensitive and attentive. This research suggests that the perception of folk healers that these illnesses cannot be dealt with by biomedical healers may be as incorrect as the perception of biomedical healers that these are mere “culture bound syndromes,” that is, not real medical problems.

Information about the folk illness caida de mollera was collected from Mexican and Mexican American migrant mothers who had treated their children for the illness, and from physicians in a clinic that served this population. These physicians believed that the vast majority of the sets of symptoms were worthy of medical attention and could be life threatening if not treated. This research report concurs with other studies that suggest that although Mexican folk illnesses are conceptualized to have folk-social and psychological causes, they are also seen to have biological causes and physiological symptoms that can be treated by biomedical methods. This report outlines a model for understanding aspects of folk illnesses that includes folk vs. biomedical ideas about disease, causes vs. symptoms, and psychological vs. physiological aspects of sickness. It also suggests that the kinds of questions anthropologists ask about these illnesses may need to be modified--shifting away from questions about treatments of causes and refocusing on those about the treatment of physiological symptoms--if we are to more fully understand home approaches to the management of these illnesses.