Julie Deninotti, Sarah Le Vigouroux, Elodie Charbonnier
{"title":"Illness representations of infertility: a cross-sectional study of women with fertility challenges.","authors":"Julie Deninotti, Sarah Le Vigouroux, Elodie Charbonnier","doi":"10.1080/13548506.2024.2411636","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The aim of this cross-sectional study was to compare women who are not experiencing infertility, women who have experienced infertility in the past, and women who are currently experiencing infertility on illness representations of infertility. Participants were 668 women recruited via social media discussion forums and divided into three groups: not experiencing infertility (<i>n</i> = 299), experienced infertility in the past (<i>n</i> = 229), and currently experiencing infertility (<i>n</i> = 140). Their illness representations (cognitive and emotional) of infertility were measured with the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire. Comparisons between the three groups showed that women who had not experienced infertility perceived fewer symptoms to be associated with infertility than the other two groups did and attributed infertility more to biological and psychological causes. Women who were currently experiencing infertility reported less negative emotions than the other two groups and attributed their infertility more to contraception, the medical profession, and their weight. Finally, women who experienced infertility in the past perceived more consequences of infertility, considered it to be more long-lasting and attributed it more to substances and environmental causes than the two other groups. Results revealed several differences between the illness representations of infertility in women. These findings highlight the need for information campaigns about infertility, with messages that are more closely tailored to the target population.</p>","PeriodicalId":54535,"journal":{"name":"Psychology Health & Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"95-107"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychology Health & Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13548506.2024.2411636","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The aim of this cross-sectional study was to compare women who are not experiencing infertility, women who have experienced infertility in the past, and women who are currently experiencing infertility on illness representations of infertility. Participants were 668 women recruited via social media discussion forums and divided into three groups: not experiencing infertility (n = 299), experienced infertility in the past (n = 229), and currently experiencing infertility (n = 140). Their illness representations (cognitive and emotional) of infertility were measured with the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire. Comparisons between the three groups showed that women who had not experienced infertility perceived fewer symptoms to be associated with infertility than the other two groups did and attributed infertility more to biological and psychological causes. Women who were currently experiencing infertility reported less negative emotions than the other two groups and attributed their infertility more to contraception, the medical profession, and their weight. Finally, women who experienced infertility in the past perceived more consequences of infertility, considered it to be more long-lasting and attributed it more to substances and environmental causes than the two other groups. Results revealed several differences between the illness representations of infertility in women. These findings highlight the need for information campaigns about infertility, with messages that are more closely tailored to the target population.
期刊介绍：
Psychology, Health & Medicine is a multidisciplinary journal highlighting human factors in health. The journal provides a peer reviewed forum to report on issues of psychology and health in practice. This key publication reaches an international audience, highlighting the variation and similarities within different settings and exploring multiple health and illness issues from theoretical, practical and management perspectives. It provides a critical forum to examine the wide range of applied health and illness issues and how they incorporate psychological knowledge, understanding, theory and intervention. The journal reflects the growing recognition of psychosocial issues as they affect health planning, medical care, disease reaction, intervention, quality of life, adjustment adaptation and management.
For many years theoretical research was very distant from applied understanding. The emerging movement in health psychology, changes in medical care provision and training, and consumer awareness of health issues all contribute to a growing need for applied research. This journal focuses on practical applications of theory, research and experience and provides a bridge between academic knowledge, illness experience, wellbeing and health care practice.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
