shh.sePublications
Planned maintenance
A system upgrade is planned for 10/12-2024, at 12:00-13:00. During this time DiVA will be unavailable.
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
The role of social media for persons affected by infertility
Sophiahemmet University.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-2139-2408
Sophiahemmet University.ORCID iD: 000-0003-3204-6583
Show others and affiliations
2020 (English)In: BMC Women's Health, E-ISSN 1472-6874, Vol. 20, no 1, article id 112Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

BACKGROUND: Infertility remains a common universal disorder and a whole range of assisted reproductive technologies has been established. Society may fail to recognize the grief caused by infertility, which may lead to those struggling with it hiding their feelings. Previous research points out that infertile persons experience shortcomings in fertility care regarding continuity of care and social support. Social media may provide social and psychological support for infertile persons. Finding others who are going through similar experiences can help in the realization that the person is not alone and that her/his feelings are reasonable. The aim was to explore the roles of social media for persons affected by infertility.

METHODS: A cross-sectional, computer-assisted, self-administered online questionnaire, containing both open and closed questions, was used to collect data. The questionnaire was linked to the bulletin board of six closed infertility social forums. Both quantitative and qualitative analysis methods were used. A total of 132 participants completed the questionnaire containing questions about their use of social media dealing with infertility.

RESULTS: Most of the questionnaires were answered by females (97.7%) through Facebook (87%). Over 60% of the respondents had taken part in discussions about infertility in social media, between one and three years and 39% participated more than once a day. Half of the participants devoted one to three hours weekly to the forums and wrote 1-5 postings per week. The forums offered participants information, solidarity, and the opportunity to receive and give support. However, an adverse aspect that was described concerned advice that were not evidence-based. Infertility was experienced as being alienated from social life and being fragmented as a person.

CONCLUSION: Participating in infertility forums offers persons information about fertility treatments and social support in the process of coping with infertility.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2020. Vol. 20, no 1, article id 112
Keywords [en]
Blogs, Experience, Infertility, Internet, Social media
National Category
Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Medicine
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:shh:diva-3747DOI: 10.1186/s12905-020-00964-0PubMedID: 32448311OAI: oai:DiVA.org:shh-3747DiVA, id: diva2:1437481
Available from: 2020-06-09 Created: 2020-06-09 Last updated: 2023-08-28Bibliographically approved
In thesis
1. Communication, coping and social networking regarding infertility
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Communication, coping and social networking regarding infertility
2021 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

Infertility is a worldwide problem and is experienced as psychologically stressful. Communication about infertility varies depending on clinical aspects, personal relationships, and culture. The aim of this thesis was to explore and describe communication, coping and social networking among infertile women from a lifeworld perspective.

Study I explored infertility-related communication and coping strategies among women affected by primary or secondary fertility problems. Structured self-administered questionnaires, administered between January and May 2012, yielded 199 responses. The questionnaire consisted of Likert scale items which were analysed with descriptive statistics and by using the Chi-square test for independence. Twice as many women with secondary infertility acknowledged that they never talked about the causes or results of tests and examinations with other persons, compared to women with primary infertility.

In Study II the aim was to gain insight into which infertility-related issues are discussed on Swedish infertility blogs. A total of 4,508 postings from 25 infertility blogs were retrieved, from May to September 2017. An interactive quantitative-qualitative content analysis was performed using the automated text analysis tool, Gavagai Explorer, developed for analysis of large sets of textual data. A sentiment analysis was performed as the tool provides sentiment scores of the data indicating whether the bloggers were writing positively or negatively about a topic. All blogs were written by women and the analysis crystallized into the following topics: Emotions, Relations, Time and waiting, Body, Care and treatment, Food and diet and Exercise. The Body topic stood out by having more negative than positive sentiment.

Study III explored infertile individuals’ experiences regarding the use and role of online social media, experiences from participating in online social media and experiences of infertility. A web-based questionnaire, linked to the bulletin boards of six closed online social media groups, during the fall of 2017, yielded 132 responses. A majority of the participants were female, and the questionnaire was answered mostly through Facebook. Of the participants, 60 percent participated in online social media focussed on infertility once a day or more, and 50 percent devoted from one to three hours weekly to these forums, with 40 percent making no postings.

Study IV was a qualitative study based on seven telephone interviews describing women’s experiences of using social media focusing on infertility. The interviews were conducted between June 2020 and November 2020 and were analysed with thematic analysis. Two themes were devolved: Invaluable venue and Opportunity of choice. Different forums were used depending where in the treatment process the women were. Further, decisions about the choices of groups were also based on the targeted age groups and geographical locations of the participants.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Stockholm: Karolinska Institutet, 2021. p. 68
National Category
Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Medicine
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:shh:diva-4127 (URN)978-91-8016-187-9 (ISBN)
Public defence
2021-05-28, Oscarsalen, Sophiahemmet Högskola, Valhallavägen 91, Hus C and online via Zoom, Stockholm, 10:00 (Swedish)
Opponent
Supervisors
Available from: 2021-06-24 Created: 2021-06-24 Last updated: 2021-06-24Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(546 kB)88 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 546 kBChecksum SHA-512
ec89b59acfa635b082daef47602358f6c8f019ce1467e62c3b9390f820348b527d5cd269bd85d18a657dcdaaa3b21fef46b751fcfab4806a95a9460e6c9dc728
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Authority records

Sormunen, TainaFossum, BjöörnWesterbotn, Margareta

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Sormunen, TainaFossum, BjöörnWesterbotn, Margareta
By organisation
Sophiahemmet University
In the same journal
BMC Women's Health
Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Medicine

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 88 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 402 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf