ArticleFrontiers in public health2024
A novel application of lemmatize and thematic analysis to understand protective measures perspectives of patients with chronic respiratory disease during the first outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To describe the perspectives of a group of COPD patients during the first outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic and narrate the emotions and polarity (acceptance-rejection) regarding living with COPD during the pandemic. Design/methods: We used a novel application of lemmatization and thematic analysis of participants' narratives. A study was carried out with eight patients with moderate-severe-very severe COPD during the first outbreak of COVID-19 using purposive sampling. In-depth interviews and field notes from the researchers were used to collect data. A statistical content analysis (lemmatization) of the patients' narratives was performed. Additionally, inductive thematic analysis was used to identify emerging themes. This study was conducted following the guidelines of Consolidated Criteria/Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research. The study was conducted in accordance with the principles articulated in the WMA Declaration of Helsinki. Participants provided verbal informed consent prior to their inclusion as previously described. Results: The average age of our sample was 65 years, and 75% of the patients suffered from moderate COPD, 12.5% from severe COPD, and 12.5% from very severe COPD according to GOLD criteria. The lemmatized and sentiment analysis showed a predominance of positive emotions, and the polarity of the interviews indicated a very slight positive trend towards acceptance of the experience lived during the pandemic. Additionally, three main themes were identified: (1) Confinement and restriction measures, (2) COVID-19 and protective measures, and (3) Clinical care during the first outbreak of the pandemic. Conclusion: Patients experienced confinement with a feeling of security and protection. They strictly respect social distancing. They used masks, but these caused them to feel short of breath and fatigue, especially FFP2 masks. Half of the patients rejected the possibility of being vaccinated. Finally, they were very satisfied with the clinical care they received in the COPD unit of their hospital. Our results show that COPD patients have not experienced a negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.