Table 1 Instruments used to measure public stigma
Author | Country | Condition | Target group | N | Evidence of validity | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SDS | ||||||
Link et al. [90] | USA | Mental health conditions | Random sample of Ohio residents | 151 | Alpha 0.92 | Â |
Lee et al. [91] | USA | HIV and AIDS | College students | 818 | No validation was reported | The SDS in this study used different items from the one adapted by Link et al. [90] used in all other studies |
Indonesia | Leprosy | Community in an endemic district | 259, 213 and 375 | Alpha 0.87, SDCa 0.60, ICC 0.75 (95% CI 0.62–0.84); no floor or ceiling effects |  | |
Sikorski et al. [92] | Germany | Obesity | Telephone sample of general public | 1008 | Alpha 0.86 | Â |
Pachankis et al. [120] | USA | 44 health conditions | Experts and general public | 1025 | Alpha 0.84 (expert raters); 0.83 general public raters | Â |
EMIC | ||||||
Vlassoff et al. [93] | Nigeria Cameroon, Ghana, Uganda | Onchocerciasis | Unaffected persons | 410 | Alpha 0.76 | 12-item EMIC was used |
Chowdhury et al. [49] | India | Mental health conditions | Non-affected lay persons | 21 | Kappa 0.90 (inter-rater) | 20–25 items, depending on version |
Stienstra et al. [94] | Ghana | Buruli ulcer | Healthy controls | 33 | Alpha 0.76 | 15-item EMIC |
Rensen et al. [96] | India | Leprosy | Non-affected community | 806 | Alpha 0.83; no floor or ceiling effects | 13-item EMIC |
Indonesia | Leprosy | Community in an endemic district | 259, 213 and 375 | Alpha 0.83, SDCa 0.81, ICC 0.84 (95% CI 0.75–0.90); no floor or ceiling effects | 15-item EMIC | |
Kaehler et al. [97] | Thailand | Leprosy | Community in an endemic district | 257 | No validation was reported | 15-item EMIC |
Adhikari et al. [133] | Nepal | Leprosy | Community in an endemic district | 281 | No validation was reported | 15-item EMIC |
Sermrittirong et al. [95] | Thailand | Leprosy, tuberculosis | Community in an endemic district | 236 | No validation was reported | 15-item EMIC |