Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
BACKGROUND: After decades of anti-stigma initiatives, the Advancing Research To Eliminate Mental Illness Stigma (ARTEMIS) intervention study is one of the first in Singapore to evaluate the effects of an anti-stigma intervention on attitudes towards depression in university students. METHODS: 390 university students from a local university in Singapore were voluntarily recruited for the study. The ARTEMIS intervention comprises an educational and social contact component, as well as a question and answer (Q&A) session with experts in the area of mental health. The Community Attitudes towards Mental Illness (CAMI) scale was administered at baseline, post-intervention and at 3-months follow-up. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted. RESULTS: The CFA identified a 3-factor model for the CAMI with a decent fit (RMSEA = 0.06, CFI = 0.93, TLI = 0.93, SRMR = 0.06). Favourable shifts in attitudes across the factors were observed immediately after the intervention (p < 0.001). Gender (β = - 1.19, 95% CI: - 2.10, - 0.27, p = 0.01) and nationality (β = - 1.23, 95% CI: - 2.35, - 0.11, p = 0.03) were identified as significant correlates for the community mental health ideology (CMHI) factor. Linear effects indicated that having a close social contact with mental illness observed a smaller decrease in authoritarianism scores from pre- to post-intervention (β = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.18, 1.53, p = 0.01); whereas quadratic effects found a greater decrease in scores from post-intervention to after 3-months for benevolence (β = - 0.34, 95% CI: - 0.52, - 0.16, p < 0.001) and CMHI (β = - 0.22, 95% CI: - 0.45, - 0.002, p = 0.048). CONCLUSION: The anti-stigma intervention shows promising short-term results across the CAMI dimensions even after adjusting for sociodemographic correlates. However, the intervention did not observe the sustained attitude shifts after 3-months. Recommendations for future anti-stigma interventions were also considered.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Goh et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: