语言在描述脑震荡中的重要性:定性分析。

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q1 REHABILITATION PM&R Pub Date : 2024-08-27 DOI:10.1002/pmrj.13256
Peter Knowles, Katherine Schneider, Amy K Bugwadia, Piya Sorcar, Roy D Pea, Daniel H Daneshvar, Christine M Baugh
{"title":"语言在描述脑震荡中的重要性:定性分析。","authors":"Peter Knowles, Katherine Schneider, Amy K Bugwadia, Piya Sorcar, Roy D Pea, Daniel H Daneshvar, Christine M Baugh","doi":"10.1002/pmrj.13256","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Concussions are mild traumatic brain injuries that are often undiagnosed due to difficulties in identifying symptoms. To minimize the negative sequelae associated with undiagnosed concussion, efforts have targeted improving concussion reporting. However, knowing more about concussions does not indicate how likely an athlete is to report their concussion. Alternatively, the attitudes and beliefs of athletes and surrounding stakeholders have shown to be a better indication of whether an athlete intends to report their concussion. Prior research has shown that athletes report concussions less often when the injury is described using language that minimizes their severity, such as when it is referred to as a \"ding.\" This study evaluated whether describing concussions using the word \"brain\" was associated with individuals' underlying attitudes and beliefs about the injury's severity.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To measure the relationship between perceived concussion severity and the language used to describe concussions, specifically whether participants used the word \"brain\" in describing the injury.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>One-on-one semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted, and a cross sectional secondary qualitative analysis was performed to assess participants' perceived concussion severity and their use of the word \"brain\" to describe concussions.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Cross-sectional secondary qualitative analysis.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>One-on-one semistructured telephone interviews.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>In 2017, 94 individuals involved in high school sports, including athletes, coaches, educators, parents of athletes, and athletic directors were recruited via convenience sampling.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Respondents' perceived severity of concussions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Individuals who used a brain phrase to describe concussion also perceived concussions as more severe (p < .001). Specifically, those who described concussions with maximum severity had higher odds of using brain phrases than those who described concussions as having minimum (odds ratio [OR] = 0.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.002-0.299, p < .001) or moderate severity (OR = 0.24, 95% CI = 0.086-0.647, p = .003), with the most significant relationship found among coaches.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These findings demonstrate the relationship between medical terminology and perceived severity of concussions. This relationship may play a role in concussion reporting behavior for coaches, athletes, and parents. Education programs using similar medical terminology may promote concussion reporting behaviors.</p>","PeriodicalId":20354,"journal":{"name":"PM&R","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The importance of language in describing concussions: A qualitative analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Peter Knowles, Katherine Schneider, Amy K Bugwadia, Piya Sorcar, Roy D Pea, Daniel H Daneshvar, Christine M Baugh\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/pmrj.13256\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Concussions are mild traumatic brain injuries that are often undiagnosed due to difficulties in identifying symptoms. To minimize the negative sequelae associated with undiagnosed concussion, efforts have targeted improving concussion reporting. However, knowing more about concussions does not indicate how likely an athlete is to report their concussion. Alternatively, the attitudes and beliefs of athletes and surrounding stakeholders have shown to be a better indication of whether an athlete intends to report their concussion. Prior research has shown that athletes report concussions less often when the injury is described using language that minimizes their severity, such as when it is referred to as a \\\"ding.\\\" This study evaluated whether describing concussions using the word \\\"brain\\\" was associated with individuals' underlying attitudes and beliefs about the injury's severity.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To measure the relationship between perceived concussion severity and the language used to describe concussions, specifically whether participants used the word \\\"brain\\\" in describing the injury.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>One-on-one semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted, and a cross sectional secondary qualitative analysis was performed to assess participants' perceived concussion severity and their use of the word \\\"brain\\\" to describe concussions.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Cross-sectional secondary qualitative analysis.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>One-on-one semistructured telephone interviews.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>In 2017, 94 individuals involved in high school sports, including athletes, coaches, educators, parents of athletes, and athletic directors were recruited via convenience sampling.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Respondents' perceived severity of concussions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Individuals who used a brain phrase to describe concussion also perceived concussions as more severe (p < .001). Specifically, those who described concussions with maximum severity had higher odds of using brain phrases than those who described concussions as having minimum (odds ratio [OR] = 0.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.002-0.299, p < .001) or moderate severity (OR = 0.24, 95% CI = 0.086-0.647, p = .003), with the most significant relationship found among coaches.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These findings demonstrate the relationship between medical terminology and perceived severity of concussions. This relationship may play a role in concussion reporting behavior for coaches, athletes, and parents. Education programs using similar medical terminology may promote concussion reporting behaviors.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20354,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PM&R\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PM&R\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/pmrj.13256\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PM&R","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pmrj.13256","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:脑震荡是一种轻微的脑外伤,由于难以识别症状,往往得不到诊断。为了最大限度地减少与未确诊脑震荡相关的负面后遗症,人们努力改善脑震荡的报告情况。然而,对脑震荡的更多了解并不能说明运动员报告脑震荡的可能性有多大。相反,运动员和周围利益相关者的态度和信念更能说明运动员是否打算报告自己的脑震荡。先前的研究表明,如果在描述脑震荡时使用了将其严重性最小化的语言,例如将其称为 "叮",那么运动员报告脑震荡的频率就会降低。本研究评估了使用 "大脑 "一词描述脑震荡是否与个人对损伤严重程度的基本态度和信念有关:测量脑震荡严重程度感知与脑震荡描述语言之间的关系,特别是参与者在描述损伤时是否使用了 "大脑 "一词:进行一对一的半结构化电话访谈,并进行横断面二次定性分析,以评估参与者感知的脑震荡严重程度以及他们在描述脑震荡时是否使用了 "大脑 "一词:设计:横断面二次定性分析:一对一半结构化电话访谈:2017年,通过便利抽样招募了94名参与高中体育运动的人员,包括运动员、教练员、教育工作者、运动员家长和体育主管:受访者对脑震荡严重程度的认知:结果:使用脑术语描述脑震荡的受访者也认为脑震荡更为严重(P这些研究结果表明了医学术语与脑震荡严重程度之间的关系。这种关系可能会对教练员、运动员和家长报告脑震荡的行为产生影响。使用类似医学术语的教育计划可能会促进脑震荡报告行为。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The importance of language in describing concussions: A qualitative analysis.

Background: Concussions are mild traumatic brain injuries that are often undiagnosed due to difficulties in identifying symptoms. To minimize the negative sequelae associated with undiagnosed concussion, efforts have targeted improving concussion reporting. However, knowing more about concussions does not indicate how likely an athlete is to report their concussion. Alternatively, the attitudes and beliefs of athletes and surrounding stakeholders have shown to be a better indication of whether an athlete intends to report their concussion. Prior research has shown that athletes report concussions less often when the injury is described using language that minimizes their severity, such as when it is referred to as a "ding." This study evaluated whether describing concussions using the word "brain" was associated with individuals' underlying attitudes and beliefs about the injury's severity.

Objective: To measure the relationship between perceived concussion severity and the language used to describe concussions, specifically whether participants used the word "brain" in describing the injury.

Methods: One-on-one semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted, and a cross sectional secondary qualitative analysis was performed to assess participants' perceived concussion severity and their use of the word "brain" to describe concussions.

Design: Cross-sectional secondary qualitative analysis.

Setting: One-on-one semistructured telephone interviews.

Participants: In 2017, 94 individuals involved in high school sports, including athletes, coaches, educators, parents of athletes, and athletic directors were recruited via convenience sampling.

Main outcome measures: Respondents' perceived severity of concussions.

Results: Individuals who used a brain phrase to describe concussion also perceived concussions as more severe (p < .001). Specifically, those who described concussions with maximum severity had higher odds of using brain phrases than those who described concussions as having minimum (odds ratio [OR] = 0.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.002-0.299, p < .001) or moderate severity (OR = 0.24, 95% CI = 0.086-0.647, p = .003), with the most significant relationship found among coaches.

Conclusions: These findings demonstrate the relationship between medical terminology and perceived severity of concussions. This relationship may play a role in concussion reporting behavior for coaches, athletes, and parents. Education programs using similar medical terminology may promote concussion reporting behaviors.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
PM&R
PM&R REHABILITATION-SPORT SCIENCES
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
4.80%
发文量
187
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Topics covered include acute and chronic musculoskeletal disorders and pain, neurologic conditions involving the central and peripheral nervous systems, rehabilitation of impairments associated with disabilities in adults and children, and neurophysiology and electrodiagnosis. PM&R emphasizes principles of injury, function, and rehabilitation, and is designed to be relevant to practitioners and researchers in a variety of medical and surgical specialties and rehabilitation disciplines including allied health.
期刊最新文献
Percutaneous ultrasound-guided A1 pulley release utilizing a modified 20-gauge spinal needle. Self-perceived preparedness for practice among graduating physical medicine & rehabilitation residents. Knee joint mechanics during gait after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using a partial or full thickness quadriceps tendon autograft at 2 years after surgery. Test Smart, Treat Smart-using clinician feedback to adapt a catheter-associated urinary tract infection intervention for spinal cord injury. Racial disparities in prosthesis use, satisfaction, and physical function in upper limb amputation and the impact of veteran status.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1