Pub Date : 2026-01-22DOI: 10.1016/j.ssmqr.2026.100713
Amy Hinterberger , Aleksandra Stelmach
This article examines how organoids, self-organizing, stem cell-derived models of human tissue, are framed in UK and US media as ethical innovations poised to replace animals in human health research. Drawing on a decade of newspaper coverage (2013–2024), we analyse how organoids are represented in relation to animals, ethics, and the rise of New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) in biomedicine. Using the animal research nexus approach, we show that media narratives consistently position organoids as both scientifically superior and ethically progressive. However, this narrative often obscures ongoing animal use in organoid-based research, particularly in chimeric studies. We argue that the ethical promise of organoids does not simply displace animal models, it reframes the terms of the debate. By critically examining how public narratives of organoids are produced and stabilized in human health research, this paper calls for more nuanced understandings of responsibility in emerging health biotechnologies, where animals remain central, even in their supposed absence.
{"title":"Beyond animal testing? Human health, organoids, and the rise of new approach methodologies in UK/US media coverage (2013–2024)","authors":"Amy Hinterberger , Aleksandra Stelmach","doi":"10.1016/j.ssmqr.2026.100713","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ssmqr.2026.100713","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This article examines how organoids, self-organizing, stem cell-derived models of human tissue, are framed in UK and US media as ethical innovations poised to replace animals in human health research. Drawing on a decade of newspaper coverage (2013–2024), we analyse how organoids are represented in relation to animals, ethics, and the rise of New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) in biomedicine. Using the animal research nexus approach, we show that media narratives consistently position organoids as both scientifically superior and ethically progressive. However, this narrative often obscures ongoing animal use in organoid-based research, particularly in chimeric studies. We argue that the ethical promise of organoids does not simply displace animal models, it reframes the terms of the debate. By critically examining how public narratives of organoids are produced and stabilized in human health research, this paper calls for more nuanced understandings of responsibility in emerging health biotechnologies, where animals remain central, even in their supposed absence.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":74862,"journal":{"name":"SSM. Qualitative research in health","volume":"9 ","pages":"Article 100713"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2026-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146172932","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-01-22DOI: 10.1016/j.ssmqr.2026.100711
Presleigh Beshirs , Sid S. Ganesh , Ricky N. Bluthenthal , Bradley T. Conner , Ashleigh Herrera
{"title":"“I would protest if they ever stopped coming out here”: How street medicine services support ontological security by building trust among a community sample of unsheltered patients in Bakersfield, California","authors":"Presleigh Beshirs , Sid S. Ganesh , Ricky N. Bluthenthal , Bradley T. Conner , Ashleigh Herrera","doi":"10.1016/j.ssmqr.2026.100711","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ssmqr.2026.100711","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":74862,"journal":{"name":"SSM. Qualitative research in health","volume":"9 ","pages":"Article 100711"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2026-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146172969","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-01-21DOI: 10.1016/j.ssmqr.2026.100709
Laura Tinner , Ana Alonso Curbelo , Kerry Gillespie
Accumulating evidence highlights that gendered health inequalities are shaped by structural and interpersonal discrimination. Existing research also suggests that disabled people suffer worse healthcare experiences and outcomes than the remainder of the population. Despite women being more likely to have a chronic illness or disability than men, and women more frequently experiencing dismissal and disbelief about their health conditions and pain, there is a scarcity of evidence surrounding the healthcare experiences of disabled and chronically ill women. Through four focus groups (n = 14) and 28 semi-structured interviews, we explored the links between discrimination and health among women in Scotland. We used intersectionality as a theoretical and applied framework to zoom in on the experiences of women with a chronic illness or disability, integrating other axes of inequality where relevant. We argue that these women occupy a particular position of amplified discrimination within healthcare, which is borne out of sexist and ableist framings of what constitutes a ‘healthy’ body. Weight blame is one neoliberal logic used in healthcare contexts that restricts disabled women's access to referrals, diagnosis, treatment, support and respect. To navigate these discriminatory healthcare systems, women advocate for themselves, alter their behaviour and balance sometimes conflicting presentations of self. We articulate how these experiences are likely drivers of entrenched gender and disability inequalities.
{"title":"Fighting the “Bog Standard”: Intersectional experiences of gender and disability discrimination within healthcare among women in Scotland","authors":"Laura Tinner , Ana Alonso Curbelo , Kerry Gillespie","doi":"10.1016/j.ssmqr.2026.100709","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ssmqr.2026.100709","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Accumulating evidence highlights that gendered health inequalities are shaped by structural and interpersonal discrimination. Existing research also suggests that disabled people suffer worse healthcare experiences and outcomes than the remainder of the population. Despite women being more likely to have a chronic illness or disability than men, and women more frequently experiencing dismissal and disbelief about their health conditions and pain, there is a scarcity of evidence surrounding the healthcare experiences of disabled and chronically ill women. Through four focus groups (n = 14) and 28 semi-structured interviews, we explored the links between discrimination and health among women in Scotland. We used intersectionality as a theoretical and applied framework to zoom in on the experiences of women with a chronic illness or disability, integrating other axes of inequality where relevant. We argue that these women occupy a particular position of amplified discrimination within healthcare, which is borne out of sexist and ableist framings of what constitutes a ‘healthy’ body. Weight blame is one neoliberal logic used in healthcare contexts that restricts disabled women's access to referrals, diagnosis, treatment, support and respect. To navigate these discriminatory healthcare systems, women advocate for themselves, alter their behaviour and balance sometimes conflicting presentations of self. We articulate how these experiences are likely drivers of entrenched gender and disability inequalities.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":74862,"journal":{"name":"SSM. Qualitative research in health","volume":"9 ","pages":"Article 100709"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2026-01-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146077370","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Integrating social representations of nature in the study of tick-borne diseases risk: the need for a holistic approach","authors":"Puppo Costanza , Hansmann Yves , Chirouze Catherine , Frey-Klett Pascale , Préau Marie","doi":"10.1016/j.ssmqr.2026.100707","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ssmqr.2026.100707","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":74862,"journal":{"name":"SSM. Qualitative research in health","volume":"9 ","pages":"Article 100707"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2026-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146077371","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-01-17DOI: 10.1016/j.ssmqr.2026.100701
Kelsi Carolan, Doreek Charles, Laura Moynihan, Rupal Parekh
Long-COVID is a serious public health concern impacting millions of adults and children around the world. Long-COVID can have substantial psychosocial repercussions, with detrimental effects on mental health, quality of life, financial wellbeing and employment, but there are limited interventions for addressing the psychosocial effects of this illness. In particular, the interventions and coping strategies individuals with long-COVID employed within the earliest days of this disease's emergence have not been fully examined – a significant gap in understanding the lived experiences of affected individuals. The authors conducted a Qualitative Interpretive Meta-Synthesis (QIMS) to identify psychosocial interventions and coping strategies utilized and valued by individuals with long-COVID, as well as any challenges such individuals encountered. This QIMS highlighted barriers to accessing treatment and psychosocial support, pinpointing needed areas for intervention. We identified 11 overarching themes across the data set of qualitative literature, emphasizing the significance of validation and empathy from healthcare providers and access to mental health care as professional interventions; and interpersonal support outside of formal systems of care, activity modification, self-advocacy and education, and meaning-making as informal interventions and coping strategies. Barriers participants encountered included healthcare-related obstacles unique to seeking care for a novel, poorly understood chronic illness, medical gaslighting, inadequate interpersonal support, and systemic barriers to well-being within and beyond the medical system. This QIMS addresses a critical gap in the long-COVID literature, with implications for the development of effective psychosocial interventions for this underserved population, as well as healthcare provider education, and healthcare and disability policy.
{"title":"Identifying interventions and coping strategies to address the psychosocial repercussions of long-COVID: A qualitative interpretive meta-synthesis (QIMS)","authors":"Kelsi Carolan, Doreek Charles, Laura Moynihan, Rupal Parekh","doi":"10.1016/j.ssmqr.2026.100701","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ssmqr.2026.100701","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Long-COVID is a serious public health concern impacting millions of adults and children around the world. Long-COVID can have substantial psychosocial repercussions, with detrimental effects on mental health, quality of life, financial wellbeing and employment, but there are limited interventions for addressing the psychosocial effects of this illness. In particular, the interventions and coping strategies individuals with long-COVID employed within the earliest days of this disease's emergence have not been fully examined – a significant gap in understanding the lived experiences of affected individuals. The authors conducted a Qualitative Interpretive Meta-Synthesis (QIMS) to identify psychosocial interventions and coping strategies utilized and valued by individuals with long-COVID, as well as any challenges such individuals encountered. This QIMS highlighted barriers to accessing treatment and psychosocial support, pinpointing needed areas for intervention. We identified 11 overarching themes across the data set of qualitative literature, emphasizing the significance of validation and empathy from healthcare providers and access to mental health care as professional interventions; and interpersonal support outside of formal systems of care, activity modification, self-advocacy and education, and meaning-making as informal interventions and coping strategies. Barriers participants encountered included healthcare-related obstacles unique to seeking care for a novel, poorly understood chronic illness, medical gaslighting, inadequate interpersonal support, and systemic barriers to well-being within and beyond the medical system. This QIMS addresses a critical gap in the long-COVID literature, with implications for the development of effective psychosocial interventions for this underserved population, as well as healthcare provider education, and healthcare and disability policy.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":74862,"journal":{"name":"SSM. Qualitative research in health","volume":"9 ","pages":"Article 100701"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2026-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146022523","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-01-17DOI: 10.1016/j.ssmqr.2026.100706
Alessandro Porrovecchio
This autoethnographic study examines the epistemic, institutional, and interpersonal dynamics shaping an interdisciplinary clinical research project in clinical sociology. The project involved a randomized controlled trial combining adapted physical activity and art therapy for oncology patients, assessed through validated questionnaires, participant observation, semi-structured interviews, and arts-based techniques.
While methodologically robust, the collaboration unfolded within a clinical setting marked by entrenched biomedical dominance and hierarchical institutional culture. Findings reveal how epistemic hierarchies privileged quantitative and biomedical approaches over qualitative and sociological contributions, generating delegitimization, symbolic control, and exclusionary practices. These tensions, embedded within broader institutional structures, translated into daily micro-interactions that produced emotional distress, frustration, and marginalization, while also eliciting acts of resistance and mutual care.
Adopting an embedded, reflexive analysis, the study situates these dynamics within literature on epistemic injustice, interdisciplinary collaboration, and the affective dimensions of research work. Implications highlight the need for institutional recognition of methodological pluralism, reflexivity training, and relational practices of care to foster more equitable partnerships. The discussion also addresses methodological limitations - including the partial anonymization and narrative simplification of events - and outlines future directions for advancing interdisciplinary research through long-term institutional partnerships grounded in openness to diverse epistemologies.
{"title":"The clinic. An autoethnographic journey through emotions, conflict, and epistemic tensions in interdisciplinary research","authors":"Alessandro Porrovecchio","doi":"10.1016/j.ssmqr.2026.100706","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ssmqr.2026.100706","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This autoethnographic study examines the epistemic, institutional, and interpersonal dynamics shaping an interdisciplinary clinical research project in clinical sociology. The project involved a randomized controlled trial combining adapted physical activity and art therapy for oncology patients, assessed through validated questionnaires, participant observation, semi-structured interviews, and arts-based techniques.</div><div>While methodologically robust, the collaboration unfolded within a clinical setting marked by entrenched biomedical dominance and hierarchical institutional culture. Findings reveal how epistemic hierarchies privileged quantitative and biomedical approaches over qualitative and sociological contributions, generating delegitimization, symbolic control, and exclusionary practices. These tensions, embedded within broader institutional structures, translated into daily micro-interactions that produced emotional distress, frustration, and marginalization, while also eliciting acts of resistance and mutual care.</div><div>Adopting an embedded, reflexive analysis, the study situates these dynamics within literature on epistemic injustice, interdisciplinary collaboration, and the affective dimensions of research work. Implications highlight the need for institutional recognition of methodological pluralism, reflexivity training, and relational practices of care to foster more equitable partnerships. The discussion also addresses methodological limitations - including the partial anonymization and narrative simplification of events - and outlines future directions for advancing interdisciplinary research through long-term institutional partnerships grounded in openness to diverse epistemologies.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":74862,"journal":{"name":"SSM. Qualitative research in health","volume":"9 ","pages":"Article 100706"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2026-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146022525","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Emerging adulthood is characterized by heightened risks to unwanted sexual and reproductive health (SRH) outcomes, particularly for young women. In the U.S., school-based sexual education programs often prioritize abstinence, leaving youth without comprehensive information on avoiding pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections. In this context, parental communication about SRH is vital to increase SRH knowledge and contraceptive autonomy. However, we lack information about how parental beliefs and parent-child communication about SRH during adolescence may influence young women's contraceptive behaviors during emerging adulthood. Therefore, we analyze 57 in-depth interviews with women attending a midwestern U.S. university to document parental SRH communication strategies, the beliefs or logics underlying these strategies, parental provision of contraception during high school, and the implications for women's contraceptive behaviors in college. In the avoidance strategy, parents avoided discussing SRH and did not provide contraceptive access largely due to religious beliefs. In the awareness strategy, parents indirectly communicated about SRH and often put daughters on contraception to address menstruation-related symptoms. Logics in this group varied from religious opposition to practical support. In the acceptance strategy, parents talked openly about SRH, used a practical support logic, and provided access to birth control for pregnancy prevention. College women in the avoidance category were more likely than others to have unprotected sex, rely on less-effective methods, and use emergency contraception. Discussing SRH issues and providing daughters access to contraception when needed is an important way parents can ensure daughters have the knowledge and tools to avoid unwanted SRH outcomes during emerging adulthood.
{"title":"Avoidance, awareness, or acceptance: Parental communication about sexual and reproductive health and college women's contraceptive behaviors","authors":"Christie Sennott , Fatimah Lawal , Piritmwa Shemu , Laurie James-Hawkins","doi":"10.1016/j.ssmqr.2026.100704","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ssmqr.2026.100704","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Emerging adulthood is characterized by heightened risks to unwanted sexual and reproductive health (SRH) outcomes, particularly for young women. In the U.S., school-based sexual education programs often prioritize abstinence, leaving youth without comprehensive information on avoiding pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections. In this context, parental communication about SRH is vital to increase SRH knowledge and contraceptive autonomy. However, we lack information about how parental beliefs and parent-child communication about SRH during adolescence may influence young women's contraceptive behaviors during emerging adulthood. Therefore, we analyze 57 in-depth interviews with women attending a midwestern U.S. university to document parental SRH communication strategies, the beliefs or logics underlying these strategies, parental provision of contraception during high school, and the implications for women's contraceptive behaviors in college. In the <em>avoidance</em> strategy, parents avoided discussing SRH and did not provide contraceptive access largely due to religious beliefs. In the <em>awareness</em> strategy, parents indirectly communicated about SRH and often put daughters on contraception to address menstruation-related symptoms. Logics in this group varied from religious opposition to practical support. In the <em>acceptance</em> strategy, parents talked openly about SRH, used a practical support logic, and provided access to birth control for pregnancy prevention. College women in the <em>avoidance</em> category were more likely than others to have unprotected sex, rely on less-effective methods, and use emergency contraception. Discussing SRH issues and providing daughters access to contraception when needed is an important way parents can ensure daughters have the knowledge and tools to avoid unwanted SRH outcomes during emerging adulthood.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":74862,"journal":{"name":"SSM. Qualitative research in health","volume":"9 ","pages":"Article 100704"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2026-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146077372","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-01-13DOI: 10.1016/j.ssmqr.2026.100703
Laura Mohacsi , Lena Stange , Eva Hummers , Evelyn Kleinert
Background
While interactions between the perception of one's own age and different parameters of health and health behavior are well-researched, only few publications focus on perceptions of old age in the context of medical decision-making. Therefore, we examined how old age is perceived by physicians, nursing staff, and people aged 75 or older in the context of medical decision-making.
Methods
The study employed a qualitative research design, conducting 16 focus group discussions (N = 79): five with physicians (n = 24), five with nursing staff (n = 28), and six with people aged 75 and older (n = 27). Discussions were initiated by two case vignettes stating geriatric decision-making situations. To include the perspectives of people unable to attend group discussions, eight individuals aged 75 or older were interviewed individually. Qualitative content analysis was used to analyze the data.
Results
Four major dimensions of old age were derived from the data: (1) age means freedom and autonomy, (2) age means (risk of) decline, (3) age brings age-related tasks, (4) age means being closer to death. They interrelate and lead to a shift in wishes, perspectives, preferences, and priorities regarding medical treatment.
Conclusion
The four identified dimensions coexist and may contradict one another. Perceptions of age and aging, both among older adults and healthcare professionals, can influence medical decision-making by shaping how priorities and preferences evolve with increasing age. These findings highlight the importance of explicitly exploring and understanding individual patients’ wishes and values, particularly in advanced age, to ensure that medical decisions align with personal perspectives and needs.
{"title":"Perceptions of age and aging in the context of medical decision-making. A qualitative, case-vignette-based focus group study with physicians, nursing staff and seniors","authors":"Laura Mohacsi , Lena Stange , Eva Hummers , Evelyn Kleinert","doi":"10.1016/j.ssmqr.2026.100703","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ssmqr.2026.100703","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>While interactions between the perception of one's own age and different parameters of health and health behavior are well-researched, only few publications focus on perceptions of old age in the context of medical decision-making. Therefore, we examined how old age is perceived by physicians, nursing staff, and people aged 75 or older in the context of medical decision-making.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>The study employed a qualitative research design, conducting 16 focus group discussions (N = 79): five with physicians (n = 24), five with nursing staff (n = 28), and six with people aged 75 and older (n = 27). Discussions were initiated by two case vignettes stating geriatric decision-making situations. To include the perspectives of people unable to attend group discussions, eight individuals aged 75 or older were interviewed individually. Qualitative content analysis was used to analyze the data.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Four major dimensions of old age were derived from the data: (1) age means freedom and autonomy, (2) age means (risk of) decline, (3) age brings age-related tasks, (4) age means being closer to death. They interrelate and lead to a shift in wishes, perspectives, preferences, and priorities regarding medical treatment.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The four identified dimensions coexist and may contradict one another. Perceptions of age and aging, both among older adults and healthcare professionals, can influence medical decision-making by shaping how priorities and preferences evolve with increasing age. These findings highlight the importance of explicitly exploring and understanding individual patients’ wishes and values, particularly in advanced age, to ensure that medical decisions align with personal perspectives and needs.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":74862,"journal":{"name":"SSM. Qualitative research in health","volume":"9 ","pages":"Article 100703"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2026-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146022522","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-01-12DOI: 10.1016/j.ssmqr.2026.100705
Polina Mesinioti , Linda Dykes , Rebecca Rigney , Laura Sheard
Objective
The study aimed to understand NHS healthcare workers’ perceptions of toxic organisational cultures and behaviours, by undertaking an analysis of tweets.
Design/setting
The prompt tweet was posted in late 2022 by @DrLindaDykes (a prominent UK physician), inviting healthcare staff to share their experiences of “red flags that indicate you're probably in a toxic organisation”. A qualitative analysis of response tweets was undertaken, using inductive thematic analysis.
Results
A total of 462 tweets were examined, revealing five key themes of what constitutes a red flag of a toxic workplace culture. The first theme was emotional depletion, with staff feeling drained and futile about their work. The second theme was incivility and unfair treatment, often rooted in a bullying culture. A third theme was a culture of blame shifting, whereby leaders and managers pressured frontline staff to resolve or take the blame for systemic issues, including understaffing. This also fed into the fourth theme, regarding staff feedback and/or concerns being ignored by leaders/managers. A fifth underlying theme was the fear of speaking out, with some employees facing punishment for doing so.
Conclusions
This study highlights the pervasive and complex nature of toxic workplace cultures within the NHS, as experienced by healthcare professionals on Twitter. The findings demonstrate the importance of analysing social media posts to amplify critical voices often absent from more traditional methods of capturing healthcare workers’ opinions, such as staff surveys, offering valuable insights into the complexities of organisational dysfunction. There is an urgent need to tackle a culture of incivility to safeguard staff wellbeing.
{"title":"“It's not bullying if I do it to everyone”: What are the red flags of a toxic healthcare workplace culture? #MedTwitter responses from UK NHS healthcare professionals – A qualitative study","authors":"Polina Mesinioti , Linda Dykes , Rebecca Rigney , Laura Sheard","doi":"10.1016/j.ssmqr.2026.100705","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ssmqr.2026.100705","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>The study aimed to understand NHS healthcare workers’ perceptions of toxic organisational cultures and behaviours, by undertaking an analysis of tweets.</div></div><div><h3>Design/setting</h3><div>The prompt tweet was posted in late 2022 by @DrLindaDykes (a prominent UK physician), inviting healthcare staff to share their experiences of “red flags that indicate you're probably in a toxic organisation”. A qualitative analysis of response tweets was undertaken, using inductive thematic analysis.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A total of 462 tweets were examined, revealing five key themes of what constitutes a red flag of a toxic workplace culture. The first theme was emotional depletion, with staff feeling drained and futile about their work. The second theme was incivility and unfair treatment, often rooted in a bullying culture. A third theme was a culture of blame shifting, whereby leaders and managers pressured frontline staff to resolve or take the blame for systemic issues, including understaffing. This also fed into the fourth theme, regarding staff feedback and/or concerns being ignored by leaders/managers. A fifth underlying theme was the fear of speaking out, with some employees facing punishment for doing so.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>This study highlights the pervasive and complex nature of toxic workplace cultures within the NHS, as experienced by healthcare professionals on Twitter. The findings demonstrate the importance of analysing social media posts to amplify critical voices often absent from more traditional methods of capturing healthcare workers’ opinions, such as staff surveys, offering valuable insights into the complexities of organisational dysfunction. There is an urgent need to tackle a culture of incivility to safeguard staff wellbeing.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":74862,"journal":{"name":"SSM. Qualitative research in health","volume":"9 ","pages":"Article 100705"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2026-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145977154","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2026-01-08DOI: 10.1016/j.ssmqr.2026.100702
A. Kamenshchikova , A. Deal , J. Carter , F. Knights , O. Bouaddi , N. Aspray , S. Bojang , F. Seedat , N. Sanchez-Clemente , A. Jachmann , S. Hargreaves
International migrants remain an under-immunised group globally. Understanding expectations that national public health infrastructures pose upon newly arrived migrants is crucial for unpacking the challenges that migrants face when seeking vaccination. Building on the concept of infrastructural familiarity – the embedded knowledge required to navigate public health systems – and focusing on Russian-speaking migrants in the UK, in this article we aim to map how this group of migrants navigate UK vaccination programmes. Following convenience sampling, we conducted 25 semi-structured interviews with Russian-speaking migrants in the UK, including 15 asylum seekers. After transcribing the interviews verbatim, we applied a combination of deductive and inductive techniques for thematic data analysis. Seven asylum seekers were self-identified as men who have sex with men (MSM), which was an important distinction when analysing migrants’ vaccination experiences in their home countries and in the UK. Having limited access to certain vaccines, such as HPV, in their home countries, MSM asylum seekers adopted a role of being proactive participants in the UK public health infrastructure. Non-MSM migrants, however, struggled to become active participants within the UK public health infrastructure, with them referring to logistical and financial challenges in accessing vaccination. Analysing these different experiences, we reflect on how UK public health infrastructures, and vaccination provision in particular, expect newly arrived migrants to become informed and active participants within these infrastructures, thus leaving those who cannot fulfil such expectations on the healthcare margins.
{"title":"Infrastructural familiarity: How Russian-speaking migrants are expected to become active participants in navigating UK vaccination programmes","authors":"A. Kamenshchikova , A. Deal , J. Carter , F. Knights , O. Bouaddi , N. Aspray , S. Bojang , F. Seedat , N. Sanchez-Clemente , A. Jachmann , S. Hargreaves","doi":"10.1016/j.ssmqr.2026.100702","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.ssmqr.2026.100702","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>International migrants remain an under-immunised group globally. Understanding expectations that national public health infrastructures pose upon newly arrived migrants is crucial for unpacking the challenges that migrants face when seeking vaccination. Building on the concept of infrastructural familiarity – the embedded knowledge required to navigate public health systems – and focusing on Russian-speaking migrants in the UK, in this article we aim to map how this group of migrants navigate UK vaccination programmes. Following convenience sampling, we conducted 25 semi-structured interviews with Russian-speaking migrants in the UK, including 15 asylum seekers. After transcribing the interviews verbatim, we applied a combination of deductive and inductive techniques for thematic data analysis. Seven asylum seekers were self-identified as men who have sex with men (MSM), which was an important distinction when analysing migrants’ vaccination experiences in their home countries and in the UK. Having limited access to certain vaccines, such as HPV, in their home countries, MSM asylum seekers adopted a role of being proactive participants in the UK public health infrastructure. Non-MSM migrants, however, struggled to become active participants within the UK public health infrastructure, with them referring to logistical and financial challenges in accessing vaccination. Analysing these different experiences, we reflect on how UK public health infrastructures, and vaccination provision in particular, expect newly arrived migrants to become informed and active participants within these infrastructures, thus leaving those who cannot fulfil such expectations on the healthcare margins.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":74862,"journal":{"name":"SSM. Qualitative research in health","volume":"9 ","pages":"Article 100702"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2026-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145976545","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号