Cited by 46Family and Disability Support ResearchGenomics and Rare DiseasesFamily Support in Illness

Reconstructing normality following the diagnosis of a childhood chronic disease: does “rare” make a difference?

Open access
Germeni, Evi, Vallini, Isabella, Bianchetti, Mario G., Schulz, Peter J.·2018·European Journal of Pediatrics

Abstract

Living with a childhood chronic disease can be challenging, especially if the diagnosis involves a rare condition. This study sought to elucidate how the diagnosis of a rare disease, as compared to a common, chronic condition, may influence maternal experiences of childhood illness. We conducted face-to-face, semi-structured interviews with 26 mothers of children treated in a pediatric hospital in the province of Lecco, Italy. Half of the participants had a child diagnosed with Bartter syndrome (BS), and the rest had a child suffering from celiac disease (CD). Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using an inductive thematic approach. We identified three main themes from the analysis of our data: (1) disrupted normality and the need to know, (2) reconstructing normality, and (3) acting "normal." Although most participants experienced the disclosure of diagnosis as a relief, processes that facilitated normality reconstruction in celiac families, notably access to appropriate information, social support, and personal contact with comparison others, were found to be important stressors for mothers living with BS. CONCLUSION: This comparative qualitative study provides evidence on how well-known problems associated with the rarity of childhood diseases impact on families' efforts to cope with the illness and regain a sense of normality. What is Known: • Families living with a rare disease have been found to experience a range of common problems, directly linked to the rarity of these pathologies. What is New: • Maximization of both emotional and instrumental social support, through provision of appropriate information or establishment of disease-specific support groups, could greatly contribute to rare disease families' efforts to cope with childhood illness and regain a sense of normality.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00431-017-3085-7

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The CD patients' organizations in Europe usually are members of the AOECS and encourage naming the condition in the social environment as something 'quite common' and 'most people are aware of CD'.

    “The CD patients' organizations in Europe usually are members of the AOECS: http://aoecs.org/members and encourage to name the condition in the social environment as something, which is 'quite common,' and 'most people are aware of CD' (151).”

    From ESPGHAN Position Paper on Management and Follow-up of Children and Adolescents With Celiac Disease. (2022) · cites this paper as [151]

    The Results (‘Acting “normal”’; page not provided) say that mothers of children with celiac disease openly named it in their social environment because they believed people were aware of it. The Results (‘Reconstructing normality’; page not provided) describe support from the Italian Celiac Association, but do not say that European patient organizations usually belong to AOECS or encourage families to describe CD as common or widely known. The paper attributes the disclosure practice to mothers, not to organizational advice. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 33 · Cited by 46

Research works printed but not linked: 29

  1. [1]Amirlak I Dawson KP Bartter syndrome: an overview QJM 2000 93 4 207 215 10.1093/qjmed/93.4.207 10787448 · DOI
  2. [2]Anderson M Elliott EJ Zurynski YA Australian families living with rare disease: experiences of diagnosis, health services use and needs for psychosocial support Orphanet J Rare Dis 2013 8 1 22 10.1186/1750-1172-8-22 23398775 PMC3599672 · DOI
  3. [3]Boaz A Morgan M Working to establish “normality” post-transplant: a qualitative study of kidney transplant patients Chronic Illn 2014 10 4 247 258 10.1177/1742395313504789 24072700 · DOI
  4. [5]Bury M Chronic illness as biographical disruption Sociol Health Illn 1982 4 2 167 182 10.1111/1467-9566.ep11339939 10260456 · DOI · Paper page
  5. [6]Caiata-Zufferey M Zanini CA Schulz PJ Syren ML Bianchetti MG Bettinelli A Living with Gitelman disease: an insight into patients’ daily experiences Nephrol Dial Transplant 2012 27 8 3196 3201 10.1093/ndt/gfs017 22334612 · DOI
  6. [7]Carricaburu D Pierret J From biographical disruption to biographical reinforcement: the case of HIV-positive men Sociol Health Illn 1995 17 1 65 88 10.1111/1467-9566.ep10934486 · DOI · Paper page
  7. [8]Dashiff CJ Parents' perceptions of diabetes in adolescent daughters and its impact on the family J Pediatr Nurs 1993 8 6 361 369 8133434
  8. [9]Deatrick JA Knafl KA Walsh M The process of parenting a child with a disability: normalization through accommodations J Adv Nurs 1998 13 15 21 10.1111/j.1365-2648.1988.tb01387.x 3372881 · DOI
  9. [10]Deatrick JA Knafl KA Murphy-Moore C Clarifying the concept of normalization Image J Nurs Sch 1999 31 3 209 214 10.1111/j.1547-5069.1999.tb00482.x 10528448 · DOI
  10. [11]Dellve L Samuelsson L Tallborn A Fasth A Hallberg LR Stress and well-being among parents of children with rare diseases: a prospective intervention study J Adv Nurs 2006 53 4 392 402 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2006.03736.x 16448482 · DOI
  11. [12]Denford S Harcourt D Rubin L Pusic A Understanding normality: a qualitative analysis of breast cancer patients concepts of normality after mastectomy and reconstructive surgery Psychooncology 2011 20 5 553 558 10.1002/pon.1762 20878855 · DOI
  12. [13]Di Sabatino A Corazza GR Celiac disease Lancet 2009 373 9673 1480 1493 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60254-3 19394538 · DOI
  13. [14]Dwyer AA Quinton R Morin D Pitteloud N Identifying the unmet health needs of patients with congenital hypogonadotropic hypogonadism using a web-based needs assessment: implications for online interventions and peer-to-peer support Orphanet J Rare Dis 2014 9 1 83 10.1186/1750-1172-9-83 24915927 PMC4059885 · DOI
  14. [16]Faircloth CA Boylstein C Rittman M Young ME Gubrium J Sudden illness and biographical flow in narratives of stroke recovery Sociol Health Illn 2004 26 2 242 261 10.1111/j.1467-9566.2004.00388.x 15027986 · DOI
  15. [17]Gregory S Living with chronic illness in the family setting Sociol Health Illn 2005 27 3 372 392 10.1111/j.1467-9566.2005.00447.x 15953213 · DOI
  16. [18]Gujral N Freeman HJ Thomson AB Celiac disease: prevalence, diagnosis, pathogenesis and treatment World J Gastroenterol 2012 18 42 6036 6059 10.3748/wjg.v18.i42.6036 23155333 PMC3496881 · DOI
  17. [19]Hale ED Treharne G Kitas G The Common-Sense Model of self-regulation of health and illness: how can we use it to understand and respond to our patients’ needs? Rheumatology 2007 46 6 904 906 10.1093/rheumatology/kem060 17449488 · DOI
  18. [20]Hatton DL Canam C Thorne S Hughes AM Parents' perceptions of caring for an infant or toddler with diabetes J Adv Nurs 1995 22 3 569 577 10.1046/j.1365-2648.1995.22030569.x 7499626 · DOI
  19. [21]Hentinen M Kyngas H Factors associated with the adaptation of parents with a chronically ill child J Clin Nurs 1998 7 4 316 324 10.1046/j.1365-2702.1998.00154.x 9830972 · DOI
  20. [22]Knafl KA Deatrick JA How families manage chronic conditions: an analysis of the concept of normalization Res Nurs Health 1986 9 3 215 222 10.1002/nur.4770090306 2945228 · DOI
  21. [23]Lammens CR Bleiker EM Verhoef S Distress in partners of individuals diagnosed with or at high risk of developing tumors due to rare hereditary cancer syndromes Psychooncology 2011 20 6 631 638 10.1002/pon.1951 21384469 · DOI
  22. [24]Leventhal H Brissette I Leventhal EA Cameron LD Leventhal H The common-sense model of self-regulation of health and illness The self-regulation of health and illness behavior 2003 London Routledge
  23. [25]Leventhal H Phillips LA Burns E The Common-Sense Model of self-regulation (CSM): a dynamic framework for understanding illness self-management J Behav Med 2016 39 6 935 946 10.1007/s10865-016-9782-2 27515801 · DOI · Paper page
  24. [26]Lincoln YS Guba EG Naturalistic inquiry 1985 California Sage Publications
  25. [28]Picci RL Oliva F Trivelli F Carezana C Zuffranieri M Ostacoli L Furlan PM Lala R Emotional burden and coping strategies of parents of children with rare diseases J Child Fam Stud 2015 24 2 514 522 10.1007/s10826-013-9864-5 · DOI
  26. [30]Rose C Howard R Living with celiac disease: a grounded theory study J Hum Nutr Diet 2014 27 1 30 40 10.1111/jhn.12062 23516989 · DOI
  27. [31]Sanderson T Calnan M Morris M Richards P Hewlett S Shifting normalities: interactions of changing conceptions of a normal life and the normalisation of symptoms in rheumatoid arthritis Sociol Health Illn 2011 33 4 618 633 10.1111/j.1467-9566.2010.01305.x 21281314 · DOI
  28. [32]Tong A Sainsbury P Craig J Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups Int J Qual Health Care 2007 19 6 349 357 10.1093/intqhc/mzm042 17872937 · DOI · Paper page
  29. [33]Zurynski Y Frith K Leonard H Elliott E Rare childhood diseases: how should we respond? Arch Dis Child 2008 93 12 1071 1074 10.1136/adc.2007.134940 18684747 · DOI

Authors
Germeni, E., Vallini, I., Bianchetti, M. G., & Schulz, P. J.
Affiliations
  • Università della Svizzera italiana (CH)
  • Ospedale San Giovanni Bellinzona (CH)
Corresponding author
Germeni, Evi
Venue
European Journal of Pediatrics
Published
2018-01-16
Volume
177
Issue
4
Pages
489-495
ISSN
  • 0340-6199 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-1076
OpenAlex
W2783939280
Cited by
46
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 1
FWCI
3.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • European Journal of Pediatrics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
University of Glasgow
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Family and Disability Support Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genomics and Rare Diseases
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Family Support in Illness
Keywords
childhood chronic disease, rare diseases, normality, maternal experience, Bartter syndrome, celiac disease, diagnosis disclosure, social support, family coping, disease information, comparison with others
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Chronic Disease, Female, Humans, Italy, Middle Aged, Mothers, Self-Help Groups, Social Support, Stress, Psychological, Rare Diseases, Qualitative Research

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review