Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31807313›Full record

ArticleDigital health

Morbid curiosity? Discussion of the disposal of amputated limbs on online question and answer sites.

Esmée Hanna

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Esmée HannaInstitute of Allied Health Sciences Research, De Montfort University, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0649-6620

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Amputation is a growing health issue with implications for the corporeal form and sense of bodily identity. Disposal of the removed limb (the amputate) has historically been suggested to impact on patient adaptation to amputation, although understandings of limb disposal are scarce within existing research. The growth of online question and answer sites has created opportunities for social actors to post and respond to a vast array of topic areas, including those that are seen as morbid or taboo. This paper then explores the discussion of amputate disposal within threads from two popular question and answer sites. Using thematic analysis, the paper examines how perceived ownership of limbs, understanding of the amputate as 'waste' and recourse to grotesque humour are key means by which limb disposal is discussed within these sites. Posters then create a new knowledge around the disposal of limbs, albeit one framed by uncertainty.

Indexed as

Amputationdisposalhealth onlineinternet-mediated communicationquestion and answer sites

Identifiers

PMID31807313
PMCPMC6880030

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.