BackgroundPublic attitudes to mental illness could influence how the public interact with, provide opportunities for, and help people with mental illness.AimsThis study aims to explore the underlying factors of the Attitudes to Mental Illness questionnaire among the general population in Singapore and the socio-demographic correlates of each factor.MethodsFrom March 2014 to April 2015, a nation-wide cross-sectional survey on mental health literacy with 3,006 participants was conducted in Singapore.ResultsFactor analysis revealed a 4-factor structure for the Attitudes to Mental Illness questionnaire among the Singapore general population, namely social distancing, tolerance/support for community care, social restrictiveness, and prejudice and misconception. Older age, male gender, lower education and socio-economic status were associated with more negative attitudes towards the mentally ill. Chinese showed more negative attitudes than Indians and Malays (except for prejudice and misconception).ConclusionsThere is a need for culture-specific interventions, and the associated factors identified in this study should be considered for future attitude campaigns.

Difficulty falling asleep or maintaining sleep, poor sleep quality, nightmares, and excessive daytime sleepiness are some of the key clinical symptoms of sleep disturbances observed among individuals with psychiatric illnesses. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of symptoms of sleep disorders including parasomnia, narcolepsy, obstructive sleep apnea, circadian rhythm disorder and restless leg syndrome/periodic limb movement (RLS/PLMS) and its correlates in patients with psychiatric diagnoses. Patients aged 21-65 years (n = 400) attending the outpatient clinics with a primary diagnosis of either schizophrenia, mood or anxiety disorder based on ICD-9 criteria were included in this cross-sectional study. Sociodemographic information was collected and screening questions pertaining to specific symptoms of sleep disorders were administered by a study team member. The overall prevalence of symptoms of sleep disorders in the psychiatric outpatient sample was 40.75% (163/400). The prevalence for symptoms of narcolepsy, sleep breathing disorder, PLMS/RLS, circadian rhythm disorder and parasomnia were 12.5%, 14.5%, 14.8%, 4.5%, and 13.8% respectively. These symptoms were associated with age, low physical activity, and anxiety disorder. Results highlight the high prevalence of symptoms of sleep disorders in psychiatric patients. Present study findings should be confirmed using diagnostic interviews and objective measures.

BackgroundWhile many studies have explored the concept and correlates of stigma towards individuals with mental illness, few have investigated the role of personality in this process. In the current study, we firstly examined the relationship between personality and stigma towards mental illness; and then explored the moderating effects of personality traits on the relationship between contact experience/s and stigma.MethodsParticipants were recruited from public medical (N = 502) and nursing schools (N = 500) from April to September 2016 in Singapore for this cross-sectional survey, and they were randomly assigned to a vignette describing one of the following mental disorders: major depressive disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder, alcohol abuse, schizophrenia, and dementia. Stigma was measured by the ‘Personal and Perceived scales of the Depression Stigma Scale’ and the ‘Social Distance Scale’. These scales together had a 3-factor structure based on a previous national study in Singapore, namely ‘weak-not-sick’, ‘dangerous/unpredictable’ and ‘social distance’. Personality was measured by the 20-item short form of the International Personality Item Pool-five factor model measure.ResultsRegression suggested agreeableness and openness to experience were negatively associated with all three domains of stigma. ‘Weak-not-sick’ and extraversion were positively associated; and ‘social distance’ was positively associated with higher scores on conscientiousness and neuroticism. Both close- and non-close contact were associated with more positive attitudes towards mental illness among the participants. Openness to experience moderated the relationships of close contact experience with ‘weak-not-sick’ and ‘dangerous/unpredictable’, but in different directions. The association between close contact and ‘social distance’ were moderated by agreeableness.ConclusionsUnlike non-close contact experience, close contact with people with mental illness worked differently on stigma for individuals with different personality traits. Future studies are needed to further explore the underlying mechanisms for such differences.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12888-018-1932-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BackgroundSimilar to the general public, mental health professionals sometimes also have negative attitudes towards individuals with mental illness; which could ultimately affect the quality of care received by the patients. This study aims to explore attitudes to mental illness among mental health professionals in Singapore; make comparisons with the general population; and investigate the significant correlates.MethodsA cross-sectional design was used. Eligible participants were recruited from the Institute of Mental Health, Singapore. Attitudes to mental illness among the mental health professionals were measured using an adapted 26-item Attitudes to Mental Illness questionnaire (AMI). An earlier study amongst the general population in Singapore had used the same tool; however, factor analysis suggested a 20-item, 4-factor structure (AMI-SG) was the best fit. This 4-factor structure was applied among the current sample of mental health professionals to allow comparisons between the professionals and the general population.Data were collected through an online survey tool ‘Questionpro’ from February to April 2016, and 379 participants were included in the current analysis. Attitudes to mental illness among these professionals were compared to those of the general population, which were captured as part of a national study conducted from March 2014 to April 2015.ResultsThe 20-item, 4-factor structure AMI-SG derived from the general population was applicable among the mental health professionals in Singapore. Compared to the general population, mental health professionals had significantly more positive attitudes to mental illness; however their scores on ‘social distancing’ did not differ from the general population. Indian ethnicity was negatively associated with ‘social distancing’ and ‘social restrictiveness’ among the professionals; while higher education was negatively related to ‘prejudice and misconception’. Compared to nurses, doctors showed significantly more positive attitudes on ‘social restrictiveness’ and ‘prejudice and misconception’. Having family or close friends diagnosed with mental illness was negatively associated with ‘social distancing’ among the professionals.ConclusionThe AMI-SG is an effective tool to measure attitudes to mental illness among mental health professionals in Singapore. Although the professionals had significantly more positive attitudes to mental illness than the general public in Singapore, their attitudes on ‘social distancing’ resembled closely that of the general public. Professionals tended to have more negative attitudes if they were nurses, less educated, and of Chinese ethnicity. More studies are needed to explore the underlying reasons for the differences and to generalize these findings among mental health professionals elsewhere.

BackgroundPositive mental health (PMH) is a combination of emotional, psychological and social well-being that is necessary for an individual to be mentally healthy. The current study aims to examine the socio-demographic differences of PMH among mental health professionals and to explore the association between job satisfaction and total PMH.MethodsDoctors, nurses and allied health staff (n = 462) completed the online survey which included the multidimensional 47-item PMH instrument as well as a single item job satisfaction question. Associations of PMH with job satisfaction were investigated via linear regression models.ResultsSignificant differences in PMH total and domain specific scores were observed across socio-demographic characteristics. Age and ethnicity were significantly correlated with PMH total scores as well as various domain scores, while gender, marital and residency status and the staff’s position were only significantly correlated with domain specific scores. Job satisfaction was also found to be a significantly associated with total PMH.ConclusionThe workplace is a key environment that affects the mental health and well-being of working adults. In order to promote and foster PMH, workplaces need to consider the importance of psychosocial well-being and the wellness of staff whilst providing an environment that supports and maintains overall health and work efficiency.