People with mental illnesses are at a higher risk than the general population of suffering from somatic diseases. However, they receive less attention from healthcare services. Some studies have indicated that this situation can be partially explained by the stigmatizing attitudes of health professionals, including nurses. With the objective to improve future nursing professionals’ attitudes towards people with mental illnesses, an intervention involving direct contact with people who had lived experience with mental illnesses was designed and its effectiveness was measured. It consisted of a single 90‐min session involving a mental health professional, a person with a mental illness, and a family member of someone with a mental illness. The intervention was based on a structured script where they described their experiences with the illness and their history of recovery, and then, they had a discussion with the attendees. The effectiveness of this approach was measured through a quasi‐experimental study with a pretest–post‐test design. The differences in the scores obtained in the AQ‐27‐E questionnaire before and after the intervention indicated that there was a decrease in fear, feelings of danger, avoidance, segregation, and coercive attitudes, while positive feelings increased, including a tendency to help and compassion. These results are important for clinical practice because this intervention could improve the quality of care provided to people with mental illnesses.

Accessible summary What is known on the subject? A therapeutic alliance with people with mental disorders could help increase the efficacy of treatment. The paradigm shift from a paternalistic model to one that respects the person's autonomy has led to professionals accepting the active role of people with mental disorders making decisions that affect their treatment. What this paper adds to existing knowledge? People with mental disorders perceive paternalistic and stigmatizing attitudes from health professionals, and they do not feel involved in decisions about their health, which can render effective therapeutic alliances difficult. The findings reveal that although people in Mediterranean countries are used to paternalistic treatment from health professionals due to cultural factors, people with mental disorders are increasingly critical of how they are treated and demand greater autonomy and respect in the decision to undergo drug therapy. What are the implications for practice? In their interactions with people with mental disorders, health professionals should include efforts aimed at improving shared decision‐making capabilities and avoiding paternalistic or stigmatizing attitudes. Abstract IntroductionA therapeutic alliance with people is essential for the efficacy of treatments. However, the traditional paternalistic values of the Mediterranean society may be incompatible with patient autonomy. AimTo explore the therapeutic relationship from the perspective of people diagnosed with mental disorders with health professionals, including nurses. MethodsThis emancipatory research was performed through focus groups, with people with mental disorders who had a variety of diagnoses and experiences of acute and community‐based mental health services and other healthcare services. Data were analysed using the content analysis method. ResultsFour main themes emerged: stereotypes and prejudice; quality of interactions and treatment; emotional and behavioural impacts; and demands. DiscussionAccording to the participants' descriptions, health professionals are not exempt from prejudice against persons with psychiatric diagnoses. They reported experiencing abuse of power, malpractice, and overmedication. Thus, in the Mediterranean culture, professional attitudes may represent a barrier for an appropriate therapeutic alliance, and people with mental disorders do not feel involved in making decisions about their health. Implications for practiceKnowing how people with mental disorders perceive their interactions with health professionals and the effects is necessary to move the care model towards more symmetric relationships that facilitate a therapeutic alliance.

BACKGROUND: An operational definition of serious mental illness (SMI) with well-defined inclusion criteria allows the identification of the most vulnerable individuals and secures resources to meet their needs and develop social programs for their treatment, rehabilitation, and recovery. In addition, the contents of a clinical construct such as SMI have an impact on both the development and the clinical application of the research results. However, currently, different ways of operationalizing the definition of SMI coexist. AIMS: The aim of this review was to explore whether unanimity exists in the operationalization of SMI definitions in quality-of-life interventions research. METHODS: A review of the literature based on searches of the MEDLINE and PsycINFO databases was conducted. Intervention studies were selected in which quality of life was the outcome variable and adults with SMI were the subject population. RESULTS: A wide range of definition of SMI is used in the scientific literature. CONCLUSIONS: There is a lack of unanimity in the variables considered necessary to identify SMI. The scientific literature uses different approaches to operationalize SMI, and these approaches vary considerably among studies. Caution is required when interpreting quality-of-life research that includes individuals labeled with SMI. It is necessary to reach a consensus on the criteria for applying the SMI label to ensure its content validity.

Stigma is one of the main barriers to prevention, treatment and recovery from mental illness. However, bibliometric studies in this area are still scarce. Therefore, our aim was to quantify and analyze the scientific literature on the stigma of nursing students and professionals towards mental disorders. To this purpose, bibliometric indicators of scientific production, impact and collaboration were used. Among our results, it stands out that only 14.3% of the total number of studies analyzed measure the efficacy of the interventions carried out to reduce stigma. Furthermore, with exceptions such as Happell B and Byrne L, collaborations between authors and institutions are limited. “Service user involvement” appeared as a prominent keyword in 2018, coinciding with the increase in publications on the effectiveness of interventions. Interventions based on the involvement of people with psychiatric diagnoses in the design of nursing curricula seem to become a promising line of research. More studies measuring the efficacy of such interventions are needed. Knowledge of the lines of research that are being developed and of the researchers and institutions involved can contribute to creating synergy between the different researchers and to continue adding projects to the existing ones, thus contributing to the generation of more robust results that show the most indicated interventions to reduce the still present stigma and improve care for people with psychiatric diagnoses.