Understanding veterinary practitioners' responses to adverse events using a combined grounded theory and netnographic natural language processing approach.

Support that mitigates the detrimental impact of adverse events on human healthcare practitioners is underpinned by an understanding of their experiences. This study used a mixed methods approach to understand veterinary practitioners' responses to adverse events. 12 focus groups and 20 intervi...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Julie Gibson, Catherine Oxtoby, Marnie L Brennan, Kate White
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2024-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0314081
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850165274088570880
author Julie Gibson
Catherine Oxtoby
Marnie L Brennan
Kate White
author_facet Julie Gibson
Catherine Oxtoby
Marnie L Brennan
Kate White
author_sort Julie Gibson
collection DOAJ
description Support that mitigates the detrimental impact of adverse events on human healthcare practitioners is underpinned by an understanding of their experiences. This study used a mixed methods approach to understand veterinary practitioners' responses to adverse events. 12 focus groups and 20 interviews with veterinary practitioners were conducted and analysed using grounded theory principles. Experiencing stress, externalising facts and feelings, morally contextualising events and catalysing personal and professional improvements were identified as components of practitioners' response. Natural language processing content analysis of posts regarding involvement in adverse events (n = 572) written by members of a veterinary member-only Facebook group was also performed, to categorise and count words within texts based on underlying meaning. Percentile scores of four summary variables along with relative frequency of function, psychological process and time orientation words used were recorded and compared with content analysis of posts where members discussed euthanasia (n = 471) and animal health certification (n = 419). Lower authenticity scores (reflecting lower honesty), differences in clout scores (reflecting dominance) and higher frequencies of moralisation, future focus, prosocial behaviour and interpersonal conflict were observed in the adverse event group compared to either comparison group. Analytical thinking scores (reflecting logical thinking) and frequencies of total, positive and negative emotion, anxiety, anger and cognitive processing words (reflecting debate) were not significantly different between the adverse events and euthanasia groups. Integration of findings confirmed and expanded inferences made in both studies regarding the emotionally detrimental impact of adverse events and the role that peer-to-peer mediated reflection and learning plays in mitigating pathologisation of responses in the aftermath of adverse events. Discordance in findings related to practitioners' intentions and expressions of honesty suggest that work is needed to normalise open discussion about adverse events. Findings may be used to lever, and to inform, peer-to-peer support for practitioners in relation to veterinary adverse events.
format Article
id doaj-art-0f66c4e0b9c643fb9a83a8dbb471f798
institution OA Journals
issn 1932-6203
language English
publishDate 2024-01-01
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
record_format Article
series PLoS ONE
spelling doaj-art-0f66c4e0b9c643fb9a83a8dbb471f7982025-08-20T02:21:47ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032024-01-011912e031408110.1371/journal.pone.0314081Understanding veterinary practitioners' responses to adverse events using a combined grounded theory and netnographic natural language processing approach.Julie GibsonCatherine OxtobyMarnie L BrennanKate WhiteSupport that mitigates the detrimental impact of adverse events on human healthcare practitioners is underpinned by an understanding of their experiences. This study used a mixed methods approach to understand veterinary practitioners' responses to adverse events. 12 focus groups and 20 interviews with veterinary practitioners were conducted and analysed using grounded theory principles. Experiencing stress, externalising facts and feelings, morally contextualising events and catalysing personal and professional improvements were identified as components of practitioners' response. Natural language processing content analysis of posts regarding involvement in adverse events (n = 572) written by members of a veterinary member-only Facebook group was also performed, to categorise and count words within texts based on underlying meaning. Percentile scores of four summary variables along with relative frequency of function, psychological process and time orientation words used were recorded and compared with content analysis of posts where members discussed euthanasia (n = 471) and animal health certification (n = 419). Lower authenticity scores (reflecting lower honesty), differences in clout scores (reflecting dominance) and higher frequencies of moralisation, future focus, prosocial behaviour and interpersonal conflict were observed in the adverse event group compared to either comparison group. Analytical thinking scores (reflecting logical thinking) and frequencies of total, positive and negative emotion, anxiety, anger and cognitive processing words (reflecting debate) were not significantly different between the adverse events and euthanasia groups. Integration of findings confirmed and expanded inferences made in both studies regarding the emotionally detrimental impact of adverse events and the role that peer-to-peer mediated reflection and learning plays in mitigating pathologisation of responses in the aftermath of adverse events. Discordance in findings related to practitioners' intentions and expressions of honesty suggest that work is needed to normalise open discussion about adverse events. Findings may be used to lever, and to inform, peer-to-peer support for practitioners in relation to veterinary adverse events.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0314081
spellingShingle Julie Gibson
Catherine Oxtoby
Marnie L Brennan
Kate White
Understanding veterinary practitioners' responses to adverse events using a combined grounded theory and netnographic natural language processing approach.
PLoS ONE
title Understanding veterinary practitioners' responses to adverse events using a combined grounded theory and netnographic natural language processing approach.
title_full Understanding veterinary practitioners' responses to adverse events using a combined grounded theory and netnographic natural language processing approach.
title_fullStr Understanding veterinary practitioners' responses to adverse events using a combined grounded theory and netnographic natural language processing approach.
title_full_unstemmed Understanding veterinary practitioners' responses to adverse events using a combined grounded theory and netnographic natural language processing approach.
title_short Understanding veterinary practitioners' responses to adverse events using a combined grounded theory and netnographic natural language processing approach.
title_sort understanding veterinary practitioners responses to adverse events using a combined grounded theory and netnographic natural language processing approach
url https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0314081
work_keys_str_mv AT juliegibson understandingveterinarypractitionersresponsestoadverseeventsusingacombinedgroundedtheoryandnetnographicnaturallanguageprocessingapproach
AT catherineoxtoby understandingveterinarypractitionersresponsestoadverseeventsusingacombinedgroundedtheoryandnetnographicnaturallanguageprocessingapproach
AT marnielbrennan understandingveterinarypractitionersresponsestoadverseeventsusingacombinedgroundedtheoryandnetnographicnaturallanguageprocessingapproach
AT katewhite understandingveterinarypractitionersresponsestoadverseeventsusingacombinedgroundedtheoryandnetnographicnaturallanguageprocessingapproach