scholarly journals Recommendations From the Twitter Hashtag #DoctorsAreDickheads: Qualitative Analysis

10.2196/17595 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (10) ◽  
pp. e17595
Author(s):  
Anjana Estelle Sharma ◽  
Ziva Mann ◽  
Roy Cherian ◽  
Jan Bing Del Rosario ◽  
Janine Yang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Qualitative Analysis ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
User Profile ◽  
Ehlers Danlos Syndrome ◽  
Health Care Experiences ◽  
Final Sample ◽  
Patient Advocates ◽  
Twitter Users ◽  
Clinical Conditions

Background The social media site Twitter has 145 million daily active users worldwide and has become a popular forum for users to communicate their health care concerns and experiences as patients. In the fall of 2018, a hashtag titled #DoctorsAreDickheads emerged, with almost 40,000 posts calling attention to health care experiences. Objective This study aims to identify common health care conditions and conceptual themes represented within the phenomenon of this viral Twitter hashtag. Methods We analyzed a random sample of 5.67% (500/8818) available tweets for qualitative analysis between October 15 and December 31, 2018, when the hashtag was the most active. Team coders reviewed the same 20.0% (100/500) tweets and the remainder individually. We abstracted the user’s health care role and clinical conditions from the tweet and user profile, and used phenomenological content analysis to identify prevalent conceptual themes through sequential open coding, memoing, and discussion of concepts until an agreement was reached. Results Our final sample comprised 491 tweets and unique Twitter users. Of this sample, 50.5% (248/491) were from patients or patient advocates, 9.6% (47/491) from health care professionals, 4.3% (21/491) from caregivers, 3.7% (18/491) from academics or researchers, 1.0% (5/491) from journalists or media, and 31.6% (155/491) from non–health care individuals or other. The most commonly mentioned clinical conditions were chronic pain, mental health, and musculoskeletal conditions (mainly Ehlers-Danlos syndrome). We identified 3 major themes: disbelief in patients’ experience and knowledge that contributes to medical errors and harm, the power inequity between patients and providers, and metacommentary on the meaning and impact of the #DoctorsAreDickheads hashtag. Conclusions People publicly disclose personal and often troubling health care experiences on Twitter. This adds new accountability for the patient-provider interaction, highlights how harmful communication affects diagnostic safety, and shapes the public’s viewpoint of how clinicians behave. Hashtags such as this offer valuable opportunities to learn from patient experiences. Recommendations include developing best practices for providers to improve communication, supporting patients through challenging diagnoses, and promoting patient engagement.

scholarly journals Recommendations From the Twitter Hashtag #DoctorsAreDickheads: Qualitative Analysis (Preprint)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anjana Estelle Sharma ◽  
Ziva Mann ◽  
Roy Cherian ◽  
Jan Bing Del Rosario ◽  
Janine Yang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Qualitative Analysis ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
User Profile ◽  
Ehlers Danlos Syndrome ◽  
Health Care Experiences ◽  
Final Sample ◽  
Patient Advocates ◽  
Twitter Users ◽  
Clinical Conditions

BACKGROUND The social media site Twitter has 145 million daily active users worldwide and has become a popular forum for users to communicate their health care concerns and experiences as patients. In the fall of 2018, a hashtag titled #DoctorsAreDickheads emerged, with almost 40,000 posts calling attention to health care experiences. OBJECTIVE This study aims to identify common health care conditions and conceptual themes represented within the phenomenon of this viral Twitter hashtag. METHODS We analyzed a random sample of 5.67% (500/8818) available tweets for qualitative analysis between October 15 and December 31, 2018, when the hashtag was the most active. Team coders reviewed the same 20.0% (100/500) tweets and the remainder individually. We abstracted the user’s health care role and clinical conditions from the tweet and user profile, and used phenomenological content analysis to identify prevalent conceptual themes through sequential open coding, memoing, and discussion of concepts until an agreement was reached. RESULTS Our final sample comprised 491 tweets and unique Twitter users. Of this sample, 50.5% (248/491) were from patients or patient advocates, 9.6% (47/491) from health care professionals, 4.3% (21/491) from caregivers, 3.7% (18/491) from academics or researchers, 1.0% (5/491) from journalists or media, and 31.6% (155/491) from non–health care individuals or other. The most commonly mentioned clinical conditions were chronic pain, mental health, and musculoskeletal conditions (mainly Ehlers-Danlos syndrome). We identified 3 major themes: disbelief in patients’ experience and knowledge that contributes to medical errors and harm, the power inequity between patients and providers, and metacommentary on the meaning and impact of the #DoctorsAreDickheads hashtag. CONCLUSIONS People publicly disclose personal and often troubling health care experiences on Twitter. This adds new accountability for the patient-provider interaction, highlights how harmful communication affects diagnostic safety, and shapes the public’s viewpoint of how clinicians behave. Hashtags such as this offer valuable opportunities to learn from patient experiences. Recommendations include developing best practices for providers to improve communication, supporting patients through challenging diagnoses, and promoting patient engagement.

An Exploration of the Relationship Between Patient Autonomy and Patient Advocacy: implications for nursing practice

2002 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. 472-482 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deirdre Hyland
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Patient Autonomy ◽  
Positive Outcome ◽  
Care Provision ◽  
Patient Advocates ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Paternalistic Approach

The purpose of this article is to examine whether patient/client autonomy is always compatible with the nurse’s role of advocacy. The author looks separately at the concepts of autonomy and advocacy, and considers them in relation to the reality of clinical practice from professional, ethical and legal perspectives. Considerable ambiguity is found regarding the legitimacy of claims of a unique function for nurses to act as patient advocates. To act as an advocate may put nurses at personal and professional risk. It may also be deemed arrogant and insulting to other health care professionals. Patient autonomy can be seen as a subcategory of the right of every individual to self-determination, and as such is protected by law. However, it is questionable whether the traditionally paternalistic approach to health care provision truly respects the autonomous rights of each patient. The author considers examples and cases from the literature that resulted in professional and/or personal difficulties for the nurses involved, and also reflects on an incident from her own practice where a positive outcome was achieved that demonstrated compatibility between the concepts under consideration.

ICU family communication and health care professionals: A qualitative analysis of perspectives

2015 ◽  
Vol 31 (5) ◽  
pp. 315-321 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jane R. Schubart ◽  
Margaret Wojnar ◽  
James Price Dillard ◽  
Eric Meczkowski ◽  
Mary Louise Kanaskie ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Qualitative Analysis ◽  
Family Communication ◽  
Health Care Professionals

An assessment of breast cancer survivorship awareness and educational needs among health care professionals

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e17542-e17542 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. De Fusco ◽  
R. Chlebowski
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Cancer Survivorship ◽  
Cancer Survivor ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Educational Needs ◽  
Survivorship Care Plan ◽  
Survivorship Care ◽  
Breast Cancer Survivorship ◽  
Patient Advocates

e17542 Background: Tremendous advances in detection and treatment have improved breast cancer survival rates. However, with nearly 22.4 million people worldwide living with cancer, optimal survivorship care has become a major focus of health care professionals (HCPs) and patient advocates. The Breast Cancer Survivorship Alliance (BCSA) is a group of HCPs and patient advocates dedicated to enhancing patient survivorship care and encouraging HCPs to look beyond the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer. Methods: To identify educational needs in breast cancer survivorship, a 25-question survey was fielded at the 2007 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium. Electronic and print surveys were available at the Y-Me National Breast Cancer Organization and AstraZeneca booths. Results: Of the 516 respondents, 29% were from the United States, 63% were from the rest of the world, and 8% did not specify a location. A total of 73% were physicians, 7% were oncology nurses, nurse practitioners, or physician assistants, and 20% represented other aspects of breast cancer care (e.g., advocates and patients). The survey revealed a lack of consensus on the definition of cancer survivor, with only 26% of respondents selecting the definition established by the National Coalition for Cancer Survivorship (ie, from the moment of cancer diagnosis and for the balance of life). More than half (i.e., 51%) defined cancer survivor as a patient who has been disease-free for 5 years. Overall wellness promotion, adherence, and management of treatment-related side effects were ranked as the 3 most essential aspects of survivorship care. While most practices engage in posttreatment survivorship counseling, only 16% provide patients with an end-of-treatment summary or survivorship care plan. Most respondents indicated that their institution has a survivorship program in place (39%) or in development (30%). Conclusions: Although progress has been made in understanding and implementing survivorship care, additional education is needed to optimize care of breast cancer survivors. [Table: see text]

scholarly journals Perceptions of health-care professionals about quality of care and barriers to management of war injuries in Gaza Strip: a qualitative analysis

The Lancet ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 398 ◽  
pp. S37
Author(s):  
Marwan Mosleh ◽  
Yousef Al Jeesh ◽  
Koustuv Dalal ◽  
Heidi Carlerby ◽  
Eija Viitasara
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Qualitative Analysis ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Gaza Strip ◽  
War Injuries

scholarly journals Dismissing chronic illness: A qualitative analysis of negative health care experiences

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 241-258 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephanie McManimen ◽  
Damani McClellan ◽  
Jamie Stoothoff ◽  
Kristen Gleason ◽  
Leonard A. Jason
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Chronic Illness ◽  
Qualitative Analysis ◽  
Health Care Experiences

“We’re all in an abusive relationship with the health-care system”: Collective memories of transgender health care

2021 ◽  
pp. e20210013
Author(s):  
Charlie Davis ◽  
Corey W. Johnson ◽  
Ashley Flanagan ◽  
Washington Silk
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Collective Memory ◽  
Health Care System ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Cultural Context ◽  
Positive Health ◽  
Memory Work ◽  
Health Care Experiences ◽  
Collective Memory Work ◽  
Care System

Collective memory work allows participants to recall, examine, and analyze their memories and experiences within a broader cultural context to see how their individual experiences link to collective, shared experiences of similar and/or different groups. This study utilized collective memory work to engage six trans participants in an examination of their individual experiences with health care. During a four-hour focus group, participants engaged in this process of discourse analysis and came to collective agreements about the meaning of their stories, the intentions of the author, and the intentions of others in their shared lived experience. In this paper, we will provide a thorough and rich description of the participants’ memories and their collective analysis, which highlights the interconnection between perceptions of oneself and their experiences with the health-care system. Our analysis revealed participants felt they had a toxic relationship with the health-care system. In particular, they discussed how health-care professionals left trans people tremulously asking for services, uncertain if they would receive care, what the quality of the care would be, and whether they would be treated respectfully. When discussing positive health-care experiences, participants highlighted when fears and anxieties were not realized, but all instances reflected some inappropriate actions. The results from this study will contribute to research on trans health care by providing a nuanced understanding of how health-care experiences impact trans communities collectively, as well as the ways in which health practices can be improved.

The benefits and burdens of patient advocacy.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 204-204
Author(s):  
Shelley Fuld Nasso ◽  
Laura Diane Porter ◽  
Kristen K. McNiff Landrum
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Cancer Research ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Working Group ◽  
Positive Impact ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
Quality Measurement ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Patient Advocates ◽  
Group Members

204 Background: Patient advocates share their time and experience to improve cancer research, care, and support. Advocacy can be rewarding and empowering, and survivors and caregivers express a variety of reasons for engaging in advocacy. Yet, advocacy can also come with mental and emotional costs. Challenges include the grief of losing friends to cancer, the related “survivors’ guilt”, and the burden of repeatedly reliving their experience. The National Coalition for Cancer Survivorship (NCCS) conducted a survey to better understand the experience of patient advocates, and actions that organizations can take to recognize and support advocates. Methods: NCCS convened two focus groups with 10 advocates (the “working group”) to understand factors that contribute to advocates feeling rewarded or burned out from advocacy. We reviewed the transcripts to identify themes and reviewed the literature. We developed a survey and included a validated, non-proprietary, single-item burnout measure used for health care professionals. We built the survey online and tested with select working group members. We disseminated the survey to NCCS’ advocacy network, and working group members shared with their networks. Results: As of June 1, we received 176 responses, with the survey will open for another week. The initial data show that the vast majority of respondents find their advocacy work rewarding (97%), empowering (93%), and a positive impact on their lives (96%). At the same time, 29.5% of respondents indicated they have symptoms of burnout, including emotional and physical exhaustion. Respondents report that their advocacy work results in exhaustion (50.7%), sadness (41.1%), and anxiousness (28.7%). More than a third (36.7%) said that grief makes it hard to maintain their work as advocates. A majority manage the demands of their advocacy work by practicing self-care (66.6%) and using coping strategies (62.5%). Advocates shared the specific practices and strategies they used. Less than half (42.5%) said they set boundaries between their advocacy work and their personal life. The final analysis of the survey data will be complete by the end of June 2021. Conclusions: The phrase, “Nothing about us, without us,” has guided the inclusion of patient and caregiver voices in the design of research, care delivery, research grant review, quality measurement, and other aspects of cancer care and cancer research. Yet organizations that ask for the mental and emotional labor of advocates, including patient organizations, researchers, health care professionals, government institutions, and pharmaceutical companies, should understand the costs to advocates and how to best support them. As one respondent said, “Perhaps organizations could set the stage for this work by openly validating the toll that cancer itself takes, and acknowledge that advocacy takes energy and commitment, which may not always be possible to sustain in the face of ongoing treatment or other life complications.”

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document