↓ Skip to main content

A mega-ethnography of eleven qualitative evidence syntheses exploring the experience of living with chronic non-malignant pain

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Research Methodology, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#27 of 1,247)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
98 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 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
A mega-ethnography of eleven qualitative evidence syntheses exploring the experience of living with chronic non-malignant pain
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12874-017-0392-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fran Toye, Kate Seers, Erin Hannink, Karen Barker

Abstract

Each year over five million people develop chronic non-malignant pain and can experience healthcare as an adversarial struggle. The aims of this study were: (1) to bring together qualitative evidence syntheses that explore patients' experience of living with chronic non-malignant pain and develop conceptual understanding of what it is like to live with chronic non-malignant pain for improved healthcare; (2) to undertake the first mega-ethnography of qualitative evidence syntheses using the methods of meta-ethnography. We used the seven stages of meta-ethnography refined for large studies. The innovation of mega-ethnography is to use conceptual findings from qualitative evidence syntheses as primary data. We searched 7 bibliographic databases from inception until February 2016 to identify qualitative evidence syntheses that explored patients' experience of living with chronic non-malignant pain. We identified 82 potential studies from 556 titles, screened 34 full text articles and included 11 qualitative evidence syntheses synthesising a total of 187 qualitative studies reporting more than 5000 international participants living with chronic pain. We abstracted concepts into 7 conceptual categories: (1) my life is impoverished and confined; (2) struggling against my body to be me; (3) the quest for the diagnostic 'holy grail'; (4) lost personal credibility; (5) trying to keep up appearances; (6) need to be treated with dignity; and (7) deciding to end the quest for the grail is not easy. Each conceptual category was supported by at least 7 of the 11 qualitative evidence syntheses. This is the first mega-ethnography, or synthesis of qualitative evidence syntheses using the methods of meta-ethnography. Findings help us to understand that the decision to end the quest for a diagnosis can leave patients feeling vulnerable and this may contribute to the adversarial nature of the clinical encounter. This knowledge demonstrates that treating a patient with a sense that they are worthy of care and hearing their story is not an adjunct to, but integral to health care.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 98 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 26%
Researcher 5 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 11%
Unspecified 3 8%
Other 3 8%
Other 13 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 16 42%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 24%
Unspecified 3 8%
Social Sciences 3 8%
Psychology 2 5%
Other 5 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 56. 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 04 March 2019.
All research outputs
#303,764
of 13,451,724 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#27
of 1,247 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,600
of 266,336 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,451,724 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,247 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
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 266,336 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them