PubMed · 16141838
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
Rod J Rohrich. 2005. Expect the unexpected.. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.prs.0000180223.96451.1c
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
OBJECTIVE: To determine the information-sharing strategies of couples considering fetal reduction, and the impact of these strategies on the chances of encountering hostility in their social networks. DESIGN: Cross-sectional design of semistructured qualitative interviews, coded with respect to sharing strategies and level of personally directed hostility encountered. SETTING: Multiple Pregnancy Management Program, Comprehensive Genetics, New York, New York. PATIENT(S) AND INTERVENTION(S): Fifty women and their partners who were making a first visit to our maternal-fetal management facility, in order to consider the possibility of multifetal reduction as a pregnancy-management strategy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Development of information-sharing strategies, and the chances of encountering personally directed hostility regarding multifetal reduction associated with more and less selective strategies. RESULT(S): Four information-sharing strategies emerged from the analysis. Two of these strategies were relatively open (extended network, and both parents). Two other strategies were relatively selective (qualified family and friends, and defended relationship). The selective strategies were significantly less likely to encounter to encounter personally directed hostility (odds ratio, 3.88; 95% confidence intervals, 0.87-17.30). CONCLUSION(S): Selective sharing of information for couples considering multifetal prgnancy reduction is a potentially useful strategy for moderating potentially stressful relationships in their social networks. Clinics should find a way of integrating the discussion of selective sharing into their clinic's cultural repertoire of patient-support services.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Concurrent and retrospective verbal protocol methods were used to collect thoughts from 18 participants during a manual handling task involving the repeated transfer of loads between locations at two tables. The effectiveness of qualitative and quantitative methods of analysing the reported information was tested in the study. A simple taxonomy was developed to investigate the content of the reports (including reports on postures and loads) and determine how the participants approached the task (whether they made plans, described actions or evaluated their completion of the task). References to posture were obtained in the verbal protocol reports, indicating that the participants had some awareness of their postures during parts of the task. There were similarities in the content of the concurrent and retrospective reports, but there were differences in the amount of detail between the methods and differences in the way the reports were constructed. There could be some scope for developing the quantitative analysis of the frequencies of references to classes of information, though this can only be recommended for concurrent reports on tasks of short duration. The analyses of qualitative data gave a deeper insight into the reports, such as identifying factors that can be important when planning to handle a load, or illustrating how participants can change their focus of attention periodically throughout the task. The relative strengths of the concurrent and retrospective methods are described, along with ideas for improving the quality of information collected in future studies. A number of potential problems with the interpretation of the reported information are explained.