↓ Skip to main content

Perspectivas otimistas na comunicação de notícias difíceis sobre a formação fetal

Overview of attention for article published in Cadernos de Saúde Pública, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Perspectivas otimistas na comunicação de notícias difíceis sobre a formação fetal
Published in
Cadernos de Saúde Pública, August 2017
DOI 10.1590/0102-311x00037716
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ana Cristina Ostermann, Minéia Frezza, Rafael Machado Rosa, Paulo Ricardo Gazzola Zen

Abstract

Communicating diagnostic news in health contexts is a potentially difficult event for all parties involved. However, despite this task's presence in the physician-patient context, it is rarely addressed during clinical training. The current study thus aimed to describe and evaluate how difficult news can be toned down during genetic counseling sessions involving cases of fetal syndromes and/or malformations. The study analyzed 33 naturalistic interactions (i.e. real situations), taped and transcribed, according to the theoretical and methodological perspective of Conversation Analysis, with an ethnomethodological basis. These interactions consisted of sessions in clinical genetics with pregnant women seen at the fetal medicine service of a reference hospital for maternal and child health in the Brazilian Unified National Health System (SUS). The analysis showed that communicating difficult news can be accompanied by optimistic perspectives that are scaled-up according to each situation's severity. In the absence of a positive diagnosis, the appointments can conclude with positive aspects such as recommendations for palliative care, so that the patient always leaves the appointment with some kind of recommendation. This study proposes to innovate and expand the scope of studies on communicating difficult news in the physician-patient relationship in Brazil, precisely by developing an analysis of real interactions in genetic counseling and thus providing interactional backing for training health professionals that deal with this challenge in their routine work.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 20%
Student > Master 3 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 3%
Lecturer 1 3%
Unspecified 1 3%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 14 47%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 13%
Psychology 2 7%
Social Sciences 2 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 3%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 14 47%
Attention Score in Context

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 24 August 2017.
All research outputs
#20,663,600
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Cadernos de Saúde Pública
#1,381
of 1,854 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#252,249
of 325,576 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cadernos de Saúde Pública
#38
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,854 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 325,576 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.