R V Jones1, B Greenwood. 1. Institute of General Practice, University of Exeter.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous investigations of the psychological consequences of having breast cancer have usually involved quantitative analysis within medical models. AIM: This qualitative study set out to identify key events which had caused distress to women with breast cancer and to compare the frequency of these events with doctors' beliefs about their relative frequency. METHOD: The causes of distress in 26 women with breast cancer were identified by qualitative analysis of unstructured interviews. Subsequently, all hospital doctors and general practitioners in the Exeter health district were sent a list in random order of the eight events which had most commonly caused distress and were asked to rank them in order of frequency for patients with breast cancer. RESULTS: The responses suggest a mismatch between the doctors' expectations and the experience of the patients. CONCLUSION: Patients may suffer distress in areas of management doctors do not suspect are important; qualitative analysis can identify these areas.
BACKGROUND: Previous investigations of the psychological consequences of having breast cancer have usually involved quantitative analysis within medical models. AIM: This qualitative study set out to identify key events which had caused distress to women with breast cancer and to compare the frequency of these events with doctors' beliefs about their relative frequency. METHOD: The causes of distress in 26 women with breast cancer were identified by qualitative analysis of unstructured interviews. Subsequently, all hospital doctors and general practitioners in the Exeter health district were sent a list in random order of the eight events which had most commonly caused distress and were asked to rank them in order of frequency for patients with breast cancer. RESULTS: The responses suggest a mismatch between the doctors' expectations and the experience of the patients. CONCLUSION:Patients may suffer distress in areas of management doctors do not suspect are important; qualitative analysis can identify these areas.
Authors: Ryan P Merkow; Karl Y Bilimoria; Karen L Sherman; Martin D McCarter; Howard S Gordon; David J Bentrem Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2013-02-26 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: E Visser; A G Leeftink; P S N van Rossum; S Siesling; R van Hillegersberg; J P Ruurda Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2016-03-24 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Chiara Di Girolamo; Sarah Walters; Carolynn Gildea; Sara Benitez Majano; Bernard Rachet; Melanie Morris Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-08-22 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Eline de Heus; Vivian Engelen; Irene Dingemans; Carol Richel; Marga Schrieks; Jan Maarten van der Zwan; Marc G Besselink; Mark I van Berge Henegouwen; Carla M L van Herpen; Saskia F A Duijts Journal: Orphanet J Rare Dis Date: 2021-06-01 Impact factor: 4.123
Authors: Robert Horne; Colin Kovacs; Christine Katlama; Bonaventura Clotet; Carmina R Fumaz; Michael Youle; Ranjababu Kulasegaram; Martin Fisher; Calvin Cohen; Jihad Slim; Peter Shalit; Vanessa Cooper; Christos Tsoukas Journal: AIDS Res Ther Date: 2009-02-05 Impact factor: 2.250
Authors: Zachary A K Frosch; Nicholas Illenberger; Nandita Mitra; Daniel J Boffa; Matthew A Facktor; Heidi Nelson; Bryan E Palis; Justin E Bekelman; Lawrence N Shulman; Samuel U Takvorian Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2021-07-01