Project description:Introduction: Pain is a perception conditioned both by the subjective experience of the sufferer and their social context. A preliminary literature search suggests that, today, information about the social legitimacy of pain is scarce, although it is known that this phenomenon is an element that is closely linked to the type of pain and contributes to the sufferer's experience. Thus, our objective is to explore how the social legitimacy of pain is tackled in the scientific literature. Methods: This study is a protocol for a systematic literature review where six databases were reviewed: Pubmed, Web of Science, Scielo, Scopus, PsycInfo, and CINAHL, were searched for papers dealing with the social legitimacy of pain from any discipline/study design. The obtained papers will be exported to Zotero, where the duplicates will be deleted. Later, the studies of interest will be selected, first on the basis of their titles/abstracts, and, later, on the complete text. This process will be carried out in pairs. Finally, the data of interest will be extracted, analyzing their quality, to finally make a qualitative analysis of the results. Discussion: This will be the first review to systematically explore the available evidence on the social legitimacy of pain. Therefore, it will be able, not only to extend the theoretical knowledge on this phenomenon, but also to extend its visibility, which will make it possible for the social legitimacy of pain to be studied from different disciplines and fields, thus improving the way it is approached.
Project description:BackgroundIn an evidence-informed patient choice the patient has access to research-based information about the effectiveness of health care options and is encouraged to use this information in treatment decisions. This concept has seen growing popularity in recent years. However, we still know relatively little about users' attitudes to the use of research-based information, possibly because people have been unexposed to this type of information. After developing the BackInfo website where the results of Cochrane systematic reviews on the effects of low back pain were adapted and presented to lay users we evaluated how users responded to this information.MethodsFocus group meetings were held with 18 chronic back pain sufferers, after they had been sent a link to the website before the meetings.ResultsThe focus groups suggest that the most important challenges to the use of BackInfo's research-based information are not primarily tied to the comprehension or presentation of the information, but are mainly associated with participants' attitudes towards the credibility of research and researchers, and the applicability of research results to themselves as individuals. Possible explanations for participants' lack of trust in research and their apparent difficulties in applying this research to their own situations include aspects that may be typical for the general public including the media's presentation of research, and a lack of familiarity with and feelings of distance to research evidence. Other aspects may be typical for patient groups with chronic and unclear medical conditions, such as a lack of trust in the health care establishment in general.ConclusionIn order to enhance the credibility and applicability of research evidence, providers of research-based information could explore a number of possibilities including the use of including personal stories to illustrate the research outcomes.
Project description:BackgroundTrigger points have been shown to be active in many myofascial pain syndromes. Treatment of trigger point pain and dysfunction may be explained through the mechanisms of central and peripheral paradigms. This study aimed to investigate whether the mind/body treatment of Neuro Emotional Technique (NET) could significantly relieve pain sensitivity of trigger points presenting in a cohort of chronic neck pain sufferers.MethodsSixty participants presenting to a private chiropractic clinic with chronic cervical pain as their primary complaint were sequentially allocated into treatment and control groups. Participants in the treatment group received a short course of Neuro Emotional Technique that consists of muscle testing, general semantics and Traditional Chinese Medicine. The control group received a sham NET protocol. Outcome measurements included pain assessment utilizing a visual analog scale and a pressure gauge algometer. Pain sensitivity was measured at four trigger point locations: suboccipital region (S); levator scapulae region (LS); sternocleidomastoid region (SCM) and temporomandibular region (TMJ). For each outcome measurement and each trigger point, we calculated the change in measurement between pre- and post- treatment. We then examined the relationships between these measurement changes and six independent variables (i.e. treatment group and the above five additional participant variables) using forward stepwise General Linear Model.ResultsThe visual analog scale (0 to 10) had an improvement of 7.6 at S, 7.2 at LS, 7.5 at SCM and 7.1 at the TMJ in the treatment group compared with no improvement of at S, and an improvement of 0.04 at LS, 0.1 at SCM and 0.1 at the TMJ point in the control group, (P < 0.001).ConclusionAfter a short course of NET treatment, measurements of visual analog scale and pressure algometer recordings of four trigger point locations in a cohort of chronic neck pain sufferers were significantly improved when compared to a control group which received a sham protocol of NET. Chronic neck pain sufferers may benefit from NET treatment in the relief of trigger point sensitivity. Further research including long-term randomised controlled trials for the effect of NET on chronic neck pain, and other chronic pain syndromes are recommended.Trial registrationThis trial has been registered and allocated the Australian Clinical Trials Registry (ACTR) number ACTRN012607000358448. The ACTR has met the requirements of the ICMJE's trials registration policy and is an ICMJE acceptable registry.
Project description:BackgroundAs technology is integrated into health care delivery, research on adoption and acceptance of health technologies leaves large gaps in practice and provides limited explanation of how and why certain technologies are adopted and others are not. In these discussions, the concept of legitimacy is omnipresent but often implicit and underdeveloped. There is no agreement about what legitimacy is or how it works across social science disciplines, despite a prolific volume of the literature centering legitimacy.ObjectiveThis study aims to explore the meaning of legitimacy in health and technology as conceptualized in the distinctive disciplines of organization and management studies, science and technology studies, and medical anthropology and sociology, including how legitimacy is produced and used. This allows us to critically combine insights across disciplines and generate new theory.MethodsWe conducted a critical interpretive synthesis literature review. Searches were conducted iteratively and were guided by preset eligibility criteria determined through thematic analysis, beginning with the selection of disciplines, followed by journals, and finally articles. We selected disciplines and journals in organization and management studies, science and technology studies, and medical anthropology and sociology using results from the Scopus and Web of Science databases and disciplinary expert-curated journal lists, focusing on the depth of legitimacy conceptualization. We selected 30 journals, yielding 796 abstracts.ResultsA total of 97 articles were included. The synthesis of the literature allowed us to produce a novel conceptualization of legitimacy as a form of social infrastructure, approaching legitimacy as a binding fabric of relationships, narratives, and materialities. We argue that the notion of legitimacy as social infrastructure is a flexible and adaptable framework for working with legitimacy both theoretically and practically.ConclusionsThe legitimacy as social infrastructure framework can aid both academics and decision makers by providing more coherent and holistic explanations for how and why new technologies are adopted or not in health care practice. For academics, our framework makes legitimacy and technology adoption empirically approachable from an ethnographic perspective; for decision makers, legitimacy as social infrastructure allows for a practical, action-oriented focus that can be assessed iteratively at any stage of the technology development and implementation process.
Project description:The relationships between subjective status and perceived legitimacy are important for understanding the extent to which people with low status are complicit in their oppression. We use novel data from 66 samples and 30 countries (N = 12,788) and find that people with higher status see the social system as more legitimate than those with lower status, but there is variation across people and countries. The association between subjective status and perceived legitimacy was never negative at any levels of eight moderator variables, although the positive association was sometimes reduced. Although not always consistent with hypotheses, group identification, self-esteem, and beliefs in social mobility were all associated with perceived legitimacy among people who have low subjective status. These findings enrich our understanding of the relationship between social status and legitimacy.
Project description:The growing availability of data and the emergence of business analytics ecosystems offer possibilities for companies developing innovative business models. However, the disruptive impact of these business models on society is not always judged favourably. This paper explores the growing tensions in the relationship between disruptive Big Data companies and society through the lens of legitimacy - a judgement about the fit and propriety of an entity, such as a company, to society. The study is based on four instrumental cases where Big Data organisations were faced with challenges to their legitimacy. The findings elaborate how digital transformations require companies to understand and manage how much to disrupt and how much to conform to social norms and values. Big Data businesses face a dynamic and paradoxical tension between the potential costs and benefits of their disruptive business models. The topic of legitimacy management is also addressed, drawing out implications for practice.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10796-021-10155-3.
Project description:ObjectiveSpinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an effective treatment for chronic neuropathic pain. However, its clinical efficacy in regard to specific types of pain has not been well studied. The primary objective of this study was to retrospectively analyze the clinical outcomes of paddle-type SCS according to the type of neuropathic pain.MethodsSeventeen patients who underwent paddle-lead SCS at our hospital were examined. Clinical outcomes were evaluated pre- and postoperatively (3 months, 1 year, and last follow-up) using the Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory (NPSI). The NPSI categorizes pain as superficial, deep, paroxysmal, evoked, or dysesthesia and assess the duration of the pain (pain time score). Changes in NPSI scores were compared with change in Visual analogue scale (VAS) scores.ResultsAfter SCS, the pain time score improved by 45% (independent t-test, p=0.0002) and the deep pain score improved by 58% (independent t-test, p=0.001). Improvements in the pain time score significantly correlated with improvements in the VAS score (r=0.667, p=0.003, Spearman correlation). Additionally, the morphine milligram equivalent value was markedly lower after vs. before surgery (~49 mg, pared t-test, p=0.002). No preoperative value was associated with clinical outcome.ConclusionThe NPSI is a useful tool for evaluating the therapeutic effects of SCS. Chronic use of a paddle-type spinal cord stimulation improved the deep pain and the pain time scores.
Project description:To what extent do individuals' perceptions of legitimacy affect their intrinsic motivations to comply with an authority? Answering this question has critical implications for law enforcement but is challenging because actions or institutions that affect intrinsic motivations typically also affect extrinsic, material ones. To disentangle these, we propose an experimental approach that separately identifies the effect of an authority's costly action to improve enforcement fairness on citizen behavior through both intrinsic and extrinsic channels. In experiment 1, the authority's simple attempt to institute fairer enforcement increases prosocial behavior by 10 to 12 percentage points via the intrinsic channel. A follow-up experiment demonstrates that this is not motivated by citizen attempts to "pay back" authorities. Our findings provide causally credible evidence that an authority's actions can directly shape citizens' behavior by enhancing her legitimacy and have important implications in policy domains where this conflicts with other incentives.
Project description:What effects do international crises have on the public legitimacy of International Organizations (IOs)? Deviating from previous research, we argue that such crises make those international organizations more salient that are mandated to solve the respective crisis. This results in two main effects. First, the public legitimacy of those IOs becomes more dependent on citizens' crisis-induced worries, leading to a more positive view of those IOs. Second, as the higher salience also leads to higher levels of elite communication regarding IOs, elite blaming of the IOs during crises results in direct negative effects on public legitimacy beliefs on IOs. Finally, both the valence and content of the elite discourse additionally moderate the positive effects of crisis-induced worries. Implementing survey experiments on public legitimacy beliefs on the WHO during the COVID-19 crisis with about 4400 respondents in Austria, Germany and Turkey, we find preliminary evidence for the expectations derived from our salience argument. In the conclusion, we discuss the implications of these findings for future research on IO legitimacy and IO legitimation.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11558-021-09452-y.
Project description:Despite decades of declining crime rates, longstanding tensions between police and the public continue to frustrate the formation of cooperative relationships necessary for the function of the police and the provision of public safety. In response, policy makers continue to promote community-oriented policing (COP) and its emphasis on positive, nonenforcement contact with the public as an effective strategy for enhancing public trust and police legitimacy. Prior research designs, however, have not leveraged the random assignment of police-public contact to identify the causal effect of such interactions on individual-level attitudes toward the police. Therefore, the question remains: Do positive, nonenforcement interactions with uniformed patrol officers actually cause meaningful improvements in attitudes toward the police? Here, we report on a randomized field experiment conducted in New Haven, CT, that sheds light on this question and identifies the individual-level consequences of positive, nonenforcement contact between police and the public. Findings indicate that a single instance of positive contact with a uniformed police officer can substantially improve public attitudes toward police, including legitimacy and willingness to cooperate. These effects persisted for up to 21 d and were not limited to individuals inclined to trust and cooperate with the police prior to the intervention. This study demonstrates that positive nonenforcement contact can improve public attitudes toward police and suggests that police departments would benefit from an increased focus on strategies that promote positive police-public interactions.