ArticleBMJ open2020
Subjective experience of meningitis survivors: a transversal qualitative study using interpretative phenomenological analysis.
Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Experiences and service-uptake factors of receiving and providing care for meningitis and its sequelae: a qualitative systematic review.BMC medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Initial Experiences with Invasive Meningococcal Disease: Insights from Survivors and Their Caregivers.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2024Article
- Life After Invasive Meningococcal Disease: Insights from Survivors and Their Caregivers.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2024Article
- Post-Meningitic Syndrome: Pathophysiology and Consequences of Streptococcal Infections on the Central Nervous System.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Living With a New Normal: Self-Identities of Women With Breast Cancer in Nigeria.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2024Article
- Lived experiences of families of meningitis patients and survivors in the Upper West Region of Ghana.PLOS global public health · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectives(1) To capture the subjective experience of meningitis survivors during adolescence and adulthood and (2) To explore how they give meaning to this specific experience.
designA qualitative study of in-depth interviews using interpretative phenomenological analysis. SETTINGS: Participants recruited through an association of persons affected by meningitis and their relatives.
participantsConvenience sample of nine participants (seven women and two men) between the ages of 18 to 48 years (mean=28.3, SD=11.4), who personally experienced meningitis.
resultsEight major themes and three main meaning-making processes in relation to the participants' experiences of meningitis were identified: (1) the ability to rely on the testimony of others, (2) the impossibility of meaning-making and (3) the possibility of post-traumatic growth. We detailed here five major themes, which appear critical to answering the objective of the study.
conclusionsThis study provides a unique insight into the first-hand experience of surviving meningitis. Findings highlighted factors characterising the disease experience, the psychological adjustment of meningitis survivors and their meaning-making processes. These findings are important for both research and clinical practice, demonstrating the importance of direct involvement of meningitis survivors in identifying key aspects of care, which include the critical role of relatives, and the importance of investigating the need for training among healthcare providers on how to diagnose meningitis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.