DOI 10.1016/j.jhsa.2016.05.007
A Thematic Analysis of Online Discussion Boards for Brachial Plexus Injury.
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Patients with brachial plexus injury (BPI) and their family members contribute to Internet discussion groups dedicated to BPI. We hypothesized that a thematic analysis of posts from BPI Internet discussion groups would reveal common themes related to the BPI patient experience, providing topics for patient education and counseling.
METHODS
Internet discussion boards were identified using the search term "brachial plexus injury support group" in Google, Bing, and Yahoo! search engines. Two discussion boards had substantially more posts than other Web sites and were chosen for analyses. Posts from January 1, 2015, through January 1, 2016, were examined. Using an iterative and established process, 2 investigators (M.T.M. and C.J.D) independently analyzed each post using thematic analysis in 3 steps (open coding, axial coding, and selective coding) to determine common themes. In this process, each post was reviewed 3 times.
RESULTS
A total of 328 posts from the 2 leading discussion boards were analyzed. Investigators reached a consensus on themes for all posts. One central theme focused on emotional aspects of BPI. Four other central themes regarding information support were identified: BPI disease, BPI treatment, recovery after BPI treatment, and process of seeking care for BPI.
CONCLUSIONS
Examination of posts on Internet support groups for BPI revealed recurring concerns, questions, and opinions of patients and their family members. The most common themes related to disease information, treatment, recovery, and the emotional element of BPI.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE: These findings provide a helpful starting point in refining topics for patient education and support that are targeted on patients' interests and concerns.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.