Back

Double Invisible Stigma in Young Adults with PFO-Related Stroke: A Qualitative Study

Chen, C.; Xu, T.; Zeng, Z.; Liu, Z.; Li, Y.; Miao, J.; Hu, R.; Gao, Y.; Li, M.; Li, C.; Yang, X.

2025-08-21 nursing
10.1101/2025.08.18.25333728 medRxiv
Show abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSEPatent foramen ovale (PFO) accounts for 40% of cryptogenic strokes in adults under 60 years. While percutaneous closure effectively prevents recurrence, psychosocial impacts remain unexplored. We aimed to develop a theoretical framework for understanding stigma experiences in young adults with PFO-related stroke. METHODSUsing constructivist grounded theory, we interviewed 26 young adults (median age 42.5 years) who underwent PFO closure following cryptogenic stroke at a tertiary center in China (2022-2024). Semi-structured interviews explored stigma experiences. Data were analyzed using constant comparative method until theoretical saturation. RESULTSAnalysis revealed "double invisible stigma", a novel phenomenon where intersection of congenital cardiac defect invisibility and age-inappropriate stroke creates compound psychological distress exceeding either condition alone. Five themes emerged: emotional landscape of compound stigma, social consequences and relational disruption, multilevel stigma sources, coping strategies and adaptation, and healthcare navigation challenges. A temporal evolution model identified three phases: Acute Bewilderment (0-3 months), Strategic Navigation (3-9 months with peak stigma), and Crystallized Duality (9+ months). High-stigma participants showed 2.3-fold higher healthcare utilization and 75% longer work disability duration. We developed the Double Invisible Stigma Screen (DIS-Screen) for clinical assessment. CONCLUSIONSYoung adults with PFO-related stroke experience unique compound stigma with predictable temporal evolution. The 3-9 month window represents critical intervention opportunity. Integration of stigma screening and phase-specific support into PFO-stroke programs may improve psychological and healthcare outcomes.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.