Perceived stigmatisation and reliability of questionnaire in the survivors with burns wound: A systematic review and meta-analysis

• Published in: International wound journal Vol. 20; no. 8; pp. 3391 - 3403
• Main Authors: Farzan, Ramyar, Hosseini, Seyed Javad, Firooz, Mahbobeh, Tabarian, Mansooreh Sadeh, Jamshidbeigi, Amirreza, Samidoust, Pirouz, Sarafi, Milad, Mahdiabadi, Morteza Zaboli, Ghorbani Vajargah, Pooyan, Mollaei, Amirabbas, Karkhah, Samad, Takasi, Poorya, Parvizi, Arman, Haddadi, Soudabeh
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England John Wiley & Sons, Inc 01.10.2023; Blackwell Publishing Ltd
• Subjects: Burns; Cronbach's alpha; Data analysis; Data integrity; Grey literature; Meta-analysis; Pediatrics; Quantitative psychology; Questionnaires; Review; Sample size; Software; Stigma; Systematic review; Brazil; United States > US; meta-analysis; questionnaire; reliability; burns; stigmatisation
• ISSN: 1742-4801; 1742-481X; 1742-481X
• DOI: 10.1111/iwj.14176

Perceived stigmatisation (PS) can cause different effects on burns survivors such as depression, low self-esteem, body image disturbance, and social anxiety. Current systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the average PS among the burns survivor population and the average reliability of the PS questionnaire (PSQ). A comprehensive systematic search was conducted in various international electronic databases, such as Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, and Persian electronic databases such as Iranmedex, and Scientific Information Database (SID) using keywords extracted from Medical Subject Headings such as "Stigmatisation", "Burns", "Reliability", and "Questionnaire" from the earliest to February 1, 2023. The COSMIN and the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklists were applied to evaluate the risk of bias. Data analysis was performed in STATA V.14 and JAMOVI v 2.3.24 software. The analysis consisted of two sections. Firstly, the overall weighted average of PS was calculated based on mean and standard deviation. Then, the reliability average of PSQ was calculated with the reliability generalisation method based on the alpha coefficient, questionnaire items, and sample size of each study. Finally, eight articles were included in the quantitative analysis. The results showed the weighted average of PS was 2.14 (ES: 2.14, 95%CI: 1.77-2.51, Z = 11.40, I :97.8%, P < 0.001). The average of PS in the factors of confused/staring behaviour, absence of friendly behaviour, and hostile behaviour was 2.36 (ES: 2.36, 95%CI: 2.05-2.67, Z = 14.86, I :92.7%, P < 0.001), 2.13 (ES: 2.13, 95%CI: 1.87-2.39, Z = 16.22, I :93.8%, P < 0.001) and 2.07 (ES: 2.07, 95%CI: 1.67-2.47, Z = 10.05, I :96.5%, P < 0.001), respectively. The analysis showed that the overall coefficient alpha of the PSQ was 0.88 (ES: 0.88, 95%CI: 0.851-0.910, Z = 58.7, I : 95.04%, P < 0.001). Also, the alpha coefficient of factors including confused/staring behaviour, absence of friendly behaviour, and hostile behaviour were 0.847 (ES: 0.847, 95%CI: 0.770-0.924, Z = 21.6, I :99.13%, P < 0.001), 0.860 (ES: 0.860, 95%CI: 0.808-0.912, Z = 32.4, I :98.02%, P < 0.001) and 0.899 (ES: 0.899, 95%CI: 0.829-0.968, Z = 21.33, I : 0.0%, P < 0.001), respectively. In sum, the current study showed that the average PS was 2.14 out of 5 points. Most survivors and parents reported confused/starring behaviour as a common perceived behaviour from different individuals. Also, the average reliability of PSQ was 0.88, and it had acceptable reliability. More studies are required to better judge the level of PS among different age groups. Also, the psychometric properties of PSQ in different cultures are an essential issue.