Life ‘on high alert’:How do people with a family history of motor neurone disease make sense of genetic risk? Insights from an online forum

Open access via Taylor and Francis agreement Acknowledgements We wish to thank the MND Association for allowing us to use the publicly available information on the MND Association Forum for this research, and for their overall support of the study. We are grateful to Karen Forrest Keenan and Gabrielle King for feedback on an earlier version of the paper. Jade Howard is funded by a doctoral studentship provided by the Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen. Funding Jade Howard is funded by a doctoral studentship provided by the Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen. Louise Locock is supported by funding from the Scottish Chief Scientist Office.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

The stories we tell:Qualitative research interviews, talking technologies and the 'normalisation' of life with HIV

Since the earliest days of the HIV/AIDS epidemic, talking about the virus has been a key way affected communities have challenged the fear and discrimination directed against them and pressed for urgent medical and political attention. Today, HIV/AIDS is one of the most prolifically and intimately documented of all health conditions, with entrenched infrastructures, practices and technologies--what Vinh-Kim Nguyen has dubbed 'confessional technologies'--aimed at encouraging those affected to share their experiences. Among these technologies, we argue, is the semi-structured interview: the principal methodology used in qualitative social science research focused on patient experiences. Taking the performative nature of the research interview as a talking technology seriously has epistemological implications not merely for how we interpret interview data, but also for how we understand the role of research interviews in the enactment of 'life with HIV'. This paper focuses on one crucial aspect of this enactment: the contemporary 'normalisation' of HIV as 'just another' chronic condition--a process taking place at the level of individual subjectivities, social identities, clinical practices and global health policy, and of which social science research is a vital part. Through an analysis of 76 interviews conducted in London (2009-10), we examine tensions in the experiential narratives of individuals living with HIV in which life with the virus is framed as 'normal', yet where this 'normality' is beset with contradictions and ambiguities. Rather than viewing these as a reflection of resistances to or failures of the enactment of HIV as 'normal', we argue that, insofar as these contradictions are generated by the research interview as a distinct 'talking technology', they emerge as crucial to the normative (re)production of what counts as 'living with HIV' (in the UK) and are an inherent part of the broader performative 'normalisation' of the virus

Biographical Value:Towards a Conceptualisation of the Commodification of Illness Narratives in Contemporary Healthcare

Illness narratives play a central role in social studies of health and illness, serving as both a key theoretical focus and a popular research method. Despite this, relatively little work has gone into conceptualising how and why illness narratives - be they in books, websites, television or other media - are commodified in contemporary healthcare and its social environment; namely, how distinctive forms of value are generated in the production, circulation, use and exchange of illness narratives. In this article we propose the notion of biographical value as a first step towards conceptualising the values attributed to illness narratives in this context. Based on a secondary analysis of 37 interviews with people affected by 15 different health conditions in the UK (all of whom have shared their illness experiences across various media) and drawing on understandings of value in research on the bioeconomy and the concept of biovalue in particular, we sketch out how epistemic, ethical and economic forms of value converge and co-constitute each other in the notion of biographical value and in broader economies of illness experiences

Health information work and the enactment of care in couples and families affected by Multiple Sclerosis

Given the considerable emphasis placed on informed choice, the management of health information has become an increasingly important part of living with chronic illness. This paper explores the intra-familial dynamics of managing health information in the context of chronic illness. Drawing on 77 interviews with people affected by Multiple Sclerosis in the UK (patients, partners, family members and close friends), we show how families develop their own idiosyncratic information practices, including the careful, at times strategic, seeking, sharing and withholding of information. We describe how one individual, most commonly either the patient or their partner, often takes primary responsibility for managing growing quantities of health information. Doing this is a complex task, yet its dynamics within the family unit remain invisible and unacknowledged. In this paper we: (a) stress the importance of understanding information management in chronic illness as a collective process across all those affected, patients as well as carers; (b) conceptualise the process of managing health information in this context as ‘health information work’; and (c) analyse it as part of the wider care practices families engage in and as a form of care in its own right

"People Power" or "Pester Power"?:YouTube as a Forum for the Generation of Evidence and Patient Advocacy

OBJECTIVE: Venoplasty has been proposed, alongside the theory of chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency (CCSVI), as a treatment for multiple sclerosis (MS). Despite concerns about its efficacy and safety, thousands of patients have undergone the procedure. This paper analyses YouTube videos where patients have shared their treatment experiences. METHODS: Content analysis on the 100 most viewed videos from over 4000 identified in a search for 'CCSVI', and qualitative thematic analysis on popular 'channels' demonstrating patients' experiences. RESULTS: Videos adopt an overwhelmingly positive stance towards CCSVI; many were uploaded by patients and present pre- and/or post-treatment experiences. Patients demonstrate rather than merely describe their symptoms, performing tests on themselves before and after treatment to quantify improvement. Videos combine medical terminology and tests with personal experiences of living with MS. CONCLUSION: Social media technologies provide patients with novel opportunities for advocating for particular treatments; generating alternative forms of 'evidence' built on a hybrid of personal experience and medical knowledge. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Healthcare practitioners need to engage with new digital forms of content, including online social media. Instead of disregarding sources not considered 'evidence-based', practitioners should enhance their understanding of what 'experiential-evidence' is deemed significant to patients, particularly in contested areas of healthcare

Fluctuating salience in those living with genetic risk of motor neuron disease : a qualitative interview study.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors would like to thank all the participants who took part in interviews and the advisory panel who supported and advised them over the study. This study was supported by a project grant from the Motor Neurone Disease (MND) Association (Locock/Sept19/941-794), which included funding for healthtalk.org dissemination.Jade Howard's PhD funding was awarded by the Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen. For the purpose of open access, the authors have applied a Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) licence to any Author Accepted Manuscript version arising from this submission Funding information Motor Neurone Disease Association, Grant/Award Number: Locock/Sept19/941‐ 794; University of AberdeenPeer reviewe

Using online patient feedback to improve NHS services : the INQUIRE multimethod study

Background Online customer feedback has become routine in many industries, but it has yet to be harnessed for service improvement in health care. Objectives To identify the current evidence on online patient feedback; to identify public and health professional attitudes and behaviour in relation to online patient feedback; to explore the experiences of patients in providing online feedback to the NHS; and to examine the practices and processes of online patient feedback within NHS trusts. Design A multimethod programme of five studies: (1) evidence synthesis and stakeholder consultation; (2) questionnaire survey of the public; (3) qualitative study of patients’ and carers’ experiences of creating and using online comment; (4) questionnaire surveys and a focus group of health-care professionals; and (5) ethnographic organisational case studies with four NHS secondary care provider organisations. Setting The UK. Methods We searched bibliographic databases and conducted hand-searches to January 2018. Synthesis was guided by themes arising from consultation with 15 stakeholders. We conducted a face-to-face survey of a representative sample of the UK population (n = 2036) and 37 purposively sampled qualitative semistructured interviews with people with experience of online feedback. We conducted online surveys of 1001 quota-sampled doctors and 749 nurses or midwives, and a focus group with five allied health professionals. We conducted ethnographic case studies at four NHS trusts, with a researcher spending 6–10 weeks at each site. Results Many people (42% of internet users in the general population) read online feedback from other patients. Fewer people (8%) write online feedback, but when they do one of their main reasons is to give praise. Most online feedback is positive in its tone and people describe caring about the NHS and wanting to help it (‘caring for care’). They also want their feedback to elicit a response as part of a conversation. Many professionals, especially doctors, are cautious about online feedback, believing it to be mainly critical and unrepresentative, and rarely encourage it. From a NHS trust perspective, online patient feedback is creating new forms of response-ability (organisations needing the infrastructure to address multiple channels and increasing amounts of online feedback) and responsivity (ensuring responses are swift and publicly visible). Limitations This work provides only a cross-sectional snapshot of a fast-emerging phenomenon. Questionnaire surveys can be limited by response bias. The quota sample of doctors and volunteer sample of nurses may not be representative. The ethnographic work was limited in its interrogation of differences between sites. Conclusions Providing and using online feedback are becoming more common for patients who are often motivated to give praise and to help the NHS improve, but health organisations and professionals are cautious and not fully prepared to use online feedback for service improvement. We identified several disconnections between patient motivations and staff and organisational perspectives, which will need to be resolved if NHS services are to engage with this source of constructive criticism and commentary from patient