Overcoming diabetes-related stigma in Iran: A participatory action research

Doosti-Irani, Mehri; Abdoli, Samereh; Parvizy, Soroor; Fatemi, N Seyed

doi:10.1016/j.apnr.2017.06.008

Cited by 20 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This feature of stigma has the ability to make people dependent on others throughout their life and impose a financial burden on family and society (Abdoli, ). It also leads to a greater burden for people with diabetes in certain population sub‐groups such as young adults and women, particularly in Asian countries (Abdoli, Abazari et al., ; Doosti Irani, ). Some Asian countries view diabetes as a sign of physical inadequacy rooted in being sick and disabled.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A discussion paper on stigmatizing features of diabetes

Abdoli

Irani²,

Hardy

et al. 2018

Nursing Open

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AimThis manuscript aims to describe stigmatizing features of diabetes.DesignThis article presents a narrative review of literature pertaining to stigma surrounding diabetes in different contexts.MethodsA literature search was conducted in CINAHL, PubMed and Web of Science for qualitative studies published between 2007–2017. The search was completed using various combinations of diabetes, T1DM, T2DM, stigma, social/public stigma, internalized/self‐stigma, stigmatization and diabetes‐related stigma in English. The reviewers then independently reviewed the eligible studies (N = 18) to extract data.ResultsFrom the 18 studies included in this narrative review, seven features related to stigma in diabetes were identified. People with diabetes were most notably considered and stigmatized as being “sick,” “death reminder,” “rejected marriage candidate,” “self‐inflicting,” “contagiousness,” “requiring a dietary modification” and “drunk or drug abuser.”

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A discussion paper on stigmatizing features of diabetes

Abdoli

Irani²,

Hardy

et al. 2018

Nursing Open

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Hartog et al (Tshabalala and Visser, 2011;Nyamathi et al, 2013;Sermrittirong et al, 2014;Go et al, 2017;Li et al, 2018) IC-CBT Cognitive Behaviour Therapy: a structured approach in which patients are trained to identify and modify negative beliefs and negative interpretations (Lusli et al, 2016) b and (Tshabalala and Visser, 2011;Li et al, 2018) Empowerment Empowerment -Contact Facilitated contact between stigmatised, learning from other stigmatised persons Nambiar et al (2011) Empowerment -Education Information for persons from the stigmatised population to understand their condition and to improve it, such as proper nutrition, responsible disclosure management (Elafros et al, 2013;Chidrawi et al, 2014) b and (Cornish, 2006;Nambiar et al, 2011;Nyamathi et al, 2013;Doosti-Irani et al, 2017;Lyons et al, 2017;Shamsaei et al, 2018) Empowerment - Group counselling Sharing, discussing with a group about topic as shared experience, positive identity change, internal stigma, disclosure and coping (Dalen, 2009;Lusli et al, 2016)b and (Koen et al, 2010;…”

Section: Supplementary Materialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…family) about the condition, how to mobilise resources, how to care. (Lusli et al, 2016) b and (Raju et al, 2008;Sermrittirong et al, 2014;Doosti-Irani et al, 2017) Home care teams (HCT) Teams that visit persons from the stigmatised population on a regular basis to strengthen home and self-care (Macq et al, 2008;Sermrittirong et al, 2014) Community based rehabilitation (CBR) Community development for rehabilitation, focusing on reintegration of people from the stigmatised population by organising screening (Arole et al, 2002;Raju et al, 2008;Nyamathi et al, 2013)…”

Section: Supplementary Materialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the community going door to door, organising a community walk or awareness raising workshops, community mobilisation (Dalen, 2009;Jain et al, 2013) b and (Boulay et al, 2008;Doosti-Irani et al, 2017;Go et al, 2017;Maulik et al, 2017) Education -Popular Opinion Leaders Local leaders, such as religious leaders, proactively speak out to improve the situation of the stigmatised population through churches or in other places within the community (Apinundecha et al, 2007;Boulay et al, 2008) Contact Contact -Direct Short-term contact between the general population and representation from the stigmatised population to share information and ask questions (Jain et al, 2013) b and (Raju et al, 2008;Jain et al, 2013;Chidrawi et al, 2014;Peters et al, 2015;Prinsloo and Greeff, 2016;Ahuja et al, 2017;Dadun et al, 2017;Doosti-Irani et al, 2017) Contact -Direct Cooperation Interaction or collaboration between the general population and the stigmatised population is facilitated (Chidrawi et al, 2014) b and (Apinundecha et al, 2007;Raju et al, 2008;…”

Section: Supplementary Materialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Stigma reduction interventions for children and adolescents in low- and middle-income countries: Systematic review of intervention strategies

Hartog

Hubbard

Krouwer

et al. 2020

Social Science & Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Stigmatisation and discrimination are common worldwide, and have profound negative impacts on health and quality of life. Research, albeit limited, has focused predominantly on adults. There is a paucity of literature about stigma reduction strategies concerning children and adolescents, with evidence especially sparse for low-and middle-income countries (LMIC). This systematic review synthesised child-focused stigma reduction strategies in LMIC, and compared these to adultfocused interventions.Relevant publications were systematically searched in July and August 2018 in the following databases; Cochrane, Embase, Global Health, HMIC, Medline, PsycINFO, PubMed and WorldWideScience.org, and through Google Custom Search. Included studies and identified reviews were cross-referenced. Three categories of search terms were used: (i) stigma, (ii) intervention, and (iii) LMIC settings. Data on study design, participants and intervention details including strategies and implementation factors were extracted.Within 61 unique publications describing 79 interventions, utilising 14 unique stigma reduction strategies, 14 papers discussed 21 interventions and 10 unique strategies involving children. Most studies targeted HIV/AIDS (50% for children, 38% for adults) or mental illness (14% vs 34%) stigma. Community education (47%), individual empowerment (15%) and social contact (12%) were most employed in child-focused interventions. Most interventions were implemented at one socio-ecological level; child-focused interventions mostly employed community-level strategies (88%). Intervention duration was mostly short; between half a day and a week.

show abstract

“…Insulin non-adherence can occur intentionally or unintentionally and involves situations where adolescents and young adults did not fill their insulin prescriptions [ 17 , 18 ], reduced or omitted doses [ 4 , 7 , 19 ]. The latter may occur for various reasons, such as fear of hypoglycemia [ 20 ], weight control [ 4 , 7 , 19 ], interference with daily routine, forgetfulness [ 13 ], problems with coping with peers [ 21 ], and social stigma [ 22 , 23 ]. Sometimes AYAs unintentionally administered the wrong dose [ 21 , 24 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Socio-cognitive determinants affecting insulin adherence/non-adherence in late adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes: a systematic review protocol

AlBurno

Mercken

Vries

et al. 2022

J Diabetes Metab Disord

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective This systematic review aims to investigate the key socio-cognitive determinants associated with adherence/non-adherence to insulin treatment in late adolescents and young adults in the age range of 17–24 years with T1D. Methods A pre-specified search strategy will be used to search for studies in the electronic databases and citation indexes: PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and PsycINFO. Two researchers will screen the title and the abstract independently, then will read and critically appraise the full text of each included study. A third independent reviewer will resolve disagreements in data extraction until consensus. Data will be extracted using the Population, Exposure, Outcomes, Study characteristics framework. Study selection will follow the updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (PRISMA 2020) and will take place from 15 October 2021 to 1 January 2022. The methodological quality and risk of bias of the observational studies will be assessed by the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Cohort and JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Analytical Cross Sectional Studies. Results A qualitative narrative synthesis will present the characteristics and the quality of studies and the outcomes of concern. Conclusion Based on the contemporary literature, this review will synthesize the evidence on the socio-cognitive determinants associated with adherence/non-adherence to insulin treatment in late adolescents and young adults in the age range of 17–24 years with T1D. The findings will help design patient-centered interventions to promote adherence to insulin in this age group, guide patients’ consultations and diabetes self-management education (DSME) programs. Protocol registration: PROSPERO ID: CRD42021233074.

show abstract

Overcoming diabetes-related stigma in Iran: A participatory action research

Cited by 20 publications

References 11 publications

A discussion paper on stigmatizing features of diabetes

A discussion paper on stigmatizing features of diabetes

Stigma reduction interventions for children and adolescents in low- and middle-income countries: Systematic review of intervention strategies

Socio-cognitive determinants affecting insulin adherence/non-adherence in late adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes: a systematic review protocol

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About