Cited by 32Psychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsPsychology and Mental HealthMedicine, History, and Philosophy

Illness perceptions of youths with functional disorders and their parents: An interpretative phenomenological analysis study

Open access
Hulgaard, Ditte Roth, Rask, Charlotte Ulrikka, Risor, Mette Bech, Dehlholm, Gitte·2020·Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry

Abstract

Background: Functional disorders, defined as disorders with no clear medical explanation, are common and impose a significant burden on youths, their families, healthcare services and society as a whole. Currently, the literature describes resistance among patients and their families towards psychological symptom explanations and treatments. More knowledge about the thoughts and understandings of youths with functional disorders and their parents is needed. The aim of this study was to explore the illness perceptions of youths with severe functional disorders and their parents. Methods: A qualitative interview study using interpretative phenomenological analyses. The study included 11 youths aged 11–15 years with functional disorders and their parents, where interviews were performed at the point of referral from a somatic to a psychiatric treatment setting. Results: Analyses identified three main themes. Themes 1(Ascribing identity to the disorder) and 2 (Monocausal explanations) explore key elements of the participants’ illness perceptions, and theme 3 (Mutable illness perceptions) explores how illness perceptions are influenced by experiences from healthcare encounters. Conclusions: The label ‘functional disorder’ was poorly integrated in the illness perceptions of the youths and their parents. Participants used a monocausal and typically physical explanation rather than a multicausal biopsychosocial explanation for their symptoms.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1359104519846194

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hulgaard, D. R., Rask, C. U., Risor, M. B., & Dehlholm, G.
Affiliations
  • University of Southern Denmark (DK)
  • Aarhus University Hospital (DK)
  • General Practice Research Unit, Department of Community Medicine, UiT, The Arctic University of Norway, Norway
Corresponding author
Hulgaard, Ditte Roth
Venue
Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry
Published
2019-05-13
Volume
25
Issue
1
Pages
45-61
ISSN
  • 1359-1045 (ISSN-L)
  • 1461-7021
OpenAlex
W2946660293
Cited by
32
References
51
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 1
FWCI
4.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Scopus (Elsevier) (submittedVersion)
  • University of Southern Denmark Research Portal (University of Southern Denmark) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Helsefonden (2014BO29)
  • Psychiatric research foundation for the Region of Southern Denmark
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychology and Mental Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Medicine, History, and Philosophy
Keywords
functional disorders, illness perception, adolescents, parents, biopsychosocial model, illness identity, healthcare encounters, somatic symptoms
MeSH terms
Medically Unexplained Symptoms, Adolescent, Adult, Child, Family Therapy, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Parents, Somatoform Disorders, Stress, Psychological, 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