| Title |
Recovering from chronic myeloid leukemia: the patients’ perspective seen through the lens of narrative medicine
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Quality of Life Research, June 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11136-017-1611-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
G. Graffigna, I. Cecchini, M. Breccia, E. Capochiani, R. Della Seta, S. Galimberti, A. Melosi, F. Simonetti, M. Pizzuti, S. F. Capalbo, F. Falzetti, P. Mazza, N. Di Renzo, L. Mastrullo, D. Rapezzi, E. Orlandi, T. Intermesoli, A. Iurlo, E. Pungolino, M. Pacilli |
| Abstract |
The main objective of this study is to gain a deeper understanding of how patients suffering from chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) cope with their illness. The study aims to reconstruct the subjective meaning-making process related to CML in order to gain insights into the impact the disease has on patients' emotions and everyday lives, as well as to explore the psychological impact of their being presented with the chance to suspend their therapy and recover from the disease. Data were gathered from a qualitative study conducted in Italy on 158 Italian CML patients. Basing the study on the narrative inquiry approach, the patients were required to describe their patient journey in a qualitative narrative diary. These contained prompts to elicit the free expression of their needs, expectations, and priorities. A lexicographic analysis was carried out with T-LAB software and in particular a thematic analysis of elementary contexts (TAECs) and a word association analysis (WAA). The TAEC detected four thematic clusters related to two factors (temporal frame and contextual setting) that explained the variance among the narratives. The WAA evidenced a wide variety of emotions, both positive and negative, as patients reacted to the possibility of interrupting their therapy. A better understanding of patients' experiences can offer insights into promoting the development of more sustainable healthcare services and into therapeutic innovation aimed at improving patients' quality of life and at engaging them more in their treatment. The findings of this study can also help make medical professionals more aware of the patient's burden and help them identify potential interactions and emotional levers to improve clinical relationships. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 60 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 10 | 17% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 8% |
| Professor | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 10 | 17% |
| Unknown | 20 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 20% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 13% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 12% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 10 | 17% |
| Unknown | 18 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 June 2017.
All research outputs
#18,554,389
of 22,979,862 outputs
Outputs from Quality of Life Research
#2,069
of 2,911 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#242,034
of 317,409 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Quality of Life Research
#47
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,979,862 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,911 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 317,409 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 75 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.