| Title |
A systematic review of disease-related stigmatization in patients living with inflammatory bowel disease
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology, March 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ceg.s83533 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tiffany H Taft, Laurie Keefer |
| Abstract |
Chronic illness stigma is a global public health issue. Most widely studied in HIV/AIDS and mental illness, stigmatization of patients living with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), chronic autoimmune conditions affecting the digestive tract, has garnered increasing attention in recent years. In this paper, we systematically review the scientific literature on stigma as it relates to IBD across its three domains: perception, internalization, and discrimination experiences. We aim to document the current state of research, identify gaps in our knowledge, recognize unique challenges that IBD patients may face as they relate to stigmatization, and offer suggestions for future research directions. Based on the current review, patients living with IBD may encounter stigmatization and this may, in turn, impact several patient outcomes including quality of life, psychological functioning, and treatment adherence. Significant gaps exist related to the understanding of IBD stigma, providing opportunity for future studies to address this important public health issue. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 56% |
| Australia | 1 | 11% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 2 | 22% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 89% |
| Scientists | 1 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 108 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 107 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 19 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 17 | 16% |
| Researcher | 11 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 16 | 15% |
| Unknown | 30 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 24 | 22% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 20% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 11 | 10% |
| Unknown | 32 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 26. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 March 2022.
All research outputs
#1,491,338
of 25,397,764 outputs
Outputs from Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology
#19
of 331 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,354
of 312,615 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,397,764 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 331 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 312,615 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.