The experiences of adolescents diagnosed with functional gastrointestinal disorders: An interpretative phenomenological analysis, 2021, Woodham et al

[Andy]

Abstract

The aim of this study was to provide a qualitative perspective of adolescents’ experiences of functional gastrointestinal disorders. In-depth semi structured interviews were conducted with eleven adolescents aged 11–16. The transcripts were analysed using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. Three superordinate themes were identified: 1) The journey to diagnosis: the good, the bad and the unknown; 2) Making sense of ‘functional’: the search for meaning; and 3) To share or conceal?: the impact of anticipated stigma on peer disclosure. The themes highlighted a complex process of meaning-making, with limited information about their diagnosis impacting on approaches to self-management and peer disclosure. Findings suggest adolescents would benefit from developmentally appropriate information and resources about the biopsychosocial aetiology of their presentation. It is considered that this may lead to greater self-efficacy in self-management of symptoms and reduce potential for perceived and self-stigma. Further implications for clinical practice and future research are discussed.

Paywall, https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/13591045211055077

 

[Cheshire]

"It is considered"...
There's no proof of it, but why just shut up when you're so convinced that you're right.

 

[rvallee]

It's the level of evidence below "some people are saying". It's not even that, because no one would say that directly, as there is no evidence, instead it's vague hand-waving as if those things were being "considered" all by themselves, a passive thing one can only observe. It's not so much pointing at evidence as vaguely gesturing towards somewhere, a dynamic gesture that moves like a hay straw in a tornado.

In a court of law, hearsay, someone saying they heard someone say something, is not even admissible, to the point where a judge will instruct the jury to disregard if such a claim finds its way to their hears. And this is not even that, it's the level below that. A level below one that is completely inadmissible in a far more permissive context.

Also I have no clue what this research is supposed to be useful at. I can't even come up with an implausible reason to do this other than because the people doing this find it interesting for their own personal reasons and that it's easy to do, takes no real effort. It serves absolutely no purpose to the world outside their imagination.

 

[CRG]

In this context "it is considered" is I think meant as speech from authority, rather than hearsay. They are saying 'we (in our wisdom) consider this to be true' .

Hearsay in a legal sense is complicated, how it is treated very much depends on jurisdiction, for example: https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/hearsay

Headlines

• The law on hearsay is set out in the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (CJA) sections 114 - 136.
• "Hearsay" means a "statement not made in oral evidence that is evidence of any matter stated." (Section 114(1) CJA 2003).
• Hearsay evidence is inadmissible in criminal proceedings except where there is some statutory provision which renders it admissible or where a common law rule making it admissible is preserved by section 118 CJA, or by agreement of all parties to the proceedings, or where the court is satisfied that it is in the interests of justice for it to be admissible (section 114(1) CJA 2003).
• There is no absolute principle that a conviction based solely or decisively on hearsay evidence is unfair as there are counter balancing measures in the hearsay framework of the CJA to make the trial fair (R v Horncastle[2010] 2 AC 373).
• Written notice must be given under the Criminal Procedure Rules (CrimPR) to the other party and to the court when making an application to admit hearsay evidence in the following cases:
  • in the interests of justice (under section 114(1)(d) CJA 2003);
  • where a witness is unavailable (section 116 CJA 2003);
  • where the evidence is in a statement prepared for the purposes of criminal proceedings (section 117(1)(c) CJA);
  • where the evidence is multiple hearsay (section 121 CJA 2003).

• Courts have an express power to exclude hearsay evidence (section 126 CJA 2003) and to stop a case where hearsay evidence is unconvincing (section 125 CJA 2003).

 

[Jonathan Edwards]

Isn't this paper an example of what Freud conceived as an obsession with the contents of one's potty - in this case the initials BPS formed by the shape of the contents?