Search

Fertility problems, often called infertility, have been defined as the inability to conceive or maintain pregnancy throughout one year of trying (World Health Organization, 2020). Because fertility problems can present unique medical, emotional, relational, and identity challenges, they are often difficult to talk about, and even well-intentioned messages can be perceived negatively. This study uses Communicated Sense-Making (CSM; Kellas & Kranstuber Horstman, 2015), particularly its mechanism of memorable messages, to explore what types of support-related messages people experiencing infertility find memorable. Results from semi-structured interviews (N = 54) indicate five supra-themes of memorable messages: (a) communicating solidarity; (b) attempting to minimize participants' stress; (c) communicating investment or interest in the patient's experience; (d) sharing expertise; and (e) absolving the patient of responsibility; we identify several sub-themes within each. We also explore patterns between message types, senders, and message valence: message themes were perceived as either positive, negative, or neutral based on the combination of sender and perceived intention. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Fertility problems, or the inability to conceive or carry a pregnancy to term for a period of over 12 months while engaging in unprotected sex, affects 12% of women and 9% of men of childbearing age. To answer calls for more research about individuals' fertility decision-making (DM) with their partners, we conducted in-depth, semi-structured interviews with 53 individuals who have experienced fertility decision-making with a romantic partner at some point in their lives. Our findings indicate at least three primary ways individuals and their partners navigated their decision-making communication in their infertility "journeys:" (1) the Driver-Navigator, (2) Driver-Passenger, and (3) Driver-Backseat Driver approaches. All decision-making communication approaches were viewed by individuals as collaborative (i.e. shared), but varied in degrees of "togetherness" (high, moderate, low) in how they communicated with each other about treatment decisions. Implications include helping couples and their clinicians to be aware of their DM approach(es) and offering alternative DM approaches based on understanding how and why certain approaches may (not) be effective in addressing goals, needs, and identities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Though experienced by more than 1 in 5 (50 million) American adults, chronic pain is invisible, subjective, difficult to communicate, and often stigmatized. When faced with a serious injury or ongoing illness, individuals create an "illness identity" by modifying their goals and expectations for the future, adapting to impairments, and understanding new emotional reactions. The current, two-phase study uses the communication theory of identity (CTI) to explore the process of illness identity adoption in the context of chronic pain, which may be different than for more understood, less stigmatized illnesses. A focus group was conducted (N = 6), from which interview protocol were created. Interview participants (N = 23) described specific differences between their pre- and post-pain selves within three identity frames: personal, relational, and enacted. Within each frame, several sub-themes of pain-related identity changes are identified, as well how they were communicated and how they subsequently influenced communication. Additionally, three pain-related identity gaps, or ways in which two identity frames contradict each other, were identified, all created explicitly because of the onset of chronic pain: personal-enacted, personal-relational, and personal-communal. Theoretical contributions include using CTI to outline the illness identity adoption process in the context of chronic pain, identifying unique identity gaps created by this relatively widespread condition. Practically, understanding pain-related identity outcomes can help pain patients make sense of and manage their situation, and de-stigmatize the chronic pain experience. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aimed to validate and extend the disclosure quality model (DQM) in the context of mental illness disclosure in romantic relationships. Participants (N = 217) were individuals who received a disclosure of mental illness from their romantic partner within the past year. The results provided validation of the DQM: greater openness (access to information and candor) in mental illness disclosure was related to higher ratings of disclosure quality, which, in turn, contributed to greater post-disclosure relational closeness. Further, our results showed that: (a) openness (particularly access to information) predicted participants' willingness to communicate with their romantic partner in the future about their mental illness and (b) inferred disclosure reasons contributed to disclosure quality, closeness, or willingness to communicate in different ways. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We offer five specific recommendations for clinician instructors to improve students' mental health-related communication, which will help prepare future providers to confidently recognize, discuss and diagnose mental health issues. In the classroom, educators can help students get in touch with their own mental health issues by normalizing mental health-related discussion. Despite the prevalence of mental health issues worldwide, medical students often have a difficult time communicating about mental health, and there is a lack of robust training on this topic. Fourth, because of systemic stigmatization of mental health issues, students may not feel comfortable talking to their own friends and family about mental health, which deprives them of honest conversations about what mental health conditions "look" like. [Extracted from the article]

This article is a systematic methodological literature review with the goal of understanding how and why health communication researchers are using mixed methods research (MMR) to better understand interpersonal communication between diabetes patients, their loved ones, and health care professionals. First, we provide a brief overview of MMR, followed by a discussion of the appropriateness of using MMR in health research. We then explain our search procedures for identifying MMR studies about interpersonal diabetes communication and describe our analysis of the identified studies. We then offer a brief, quantitative summary of our findings and provide details of exemplar studies to illustrate the unique value added by using MMR. We conclude the article with a discussion of implications and recommendations for the use of MMR in diabetes communication research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]