IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v20y2023i3p2221-d1047371.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Gynaecological Cancers in India: The Less Heard Perspectives of Healthcare Providers

Author

Listed:
  • Kalyani Subbiah

    (Curtin School of Population Health, Curtin University, Perth 6102, Australia)

  • Arima Mishra

    (Azim Premji University, Bengaluru 562125, Karnataka, India)

  • Jaya A. R. Dantas

    (Curtin School of Population Health, Curtin University, Perth 6102, Australia)

Abstract

There has been mounting evidence on the role of healthcare providers in chronic illnesses such as cancer. The specific complexities in their roles to enable health are less heard. Gynaecological cancers have several undercurrents beyond the obvious. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with healthcare providers in Southern India ( n = 35) and the data presented in this article were collected as a part of a larger study on the role of communication in the management of gynaecological cancers in India. Thematic analysis of the qualitative data provided information on the providers’ perspectives of gynaecological cancers. Patient numbers, cost, time, cultural norms, context, and institutional constraints in cancer care provision are just some of the factors impacting care provision. Healthcare providers are typically acknowledged for the criticality of their roles in the continuum of care. However, our research suggests that the psychological harm and challenges they themselves may face in providing that care are severely neglected. Through listening to healthcare provider voices, clear solutions emerge to better support the practice of those who are responsible for cancer care.

Suggested Citation

  • Kalyani Subbiah & Arima Mishra & Jaya A. R. Dantas, 2023. "Gynaecological Cancers in India: The Less Heard Perspectives of Healthcare Providers," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(3), pages 1-16, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:3:p:2221-:d:1047371
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/3/2221/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/3/2221/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yang Yang & Jennifer Pankow & Holly Swan & Jennifer Willett & Shannon Gwin Mitchell & Danielle S. Rudes & Kevin Knight, 2018. "Preparing for analysis: a practical guide for a critical step for procedural rigor in large-scale multisite qualitative research studies," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 52(2), pages 815-828, March.
    2. Merry-Jo D. Levers, 2013. "Philosophical Paradigms, Grounded Theory, and Perspectives on Emergence," SAGE Open, , vol. 3(4), pages 21582440135, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mohajan, Devajit & Mohajan, Haradhan, 2023. "Families of Grounded Theory: A Theoretical Structure for Novel Researchers," MPRA Paper 116752, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 24 Jan 2023.
    2. Emily Ryan & Matthew Pepper & Albert Munoz, 2021. "Causal Loop Diagram Aggregation Towards Model Completeness," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 37-51, February.
    3. Stephen Case, 2021. "Challenging the Reductionism of “Evidence-Based” Youth Justice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-18, February.
    4. Martin Reynolds & Emily Gates & Richard Hummelbrunner & Mita Marra & Bob Williams, 2016. "Towards Systemic Evaluation," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(5), pages 662-673, September.
    5. Fregidou-Malama, Maria & Hyder, Akmal S., 2021. "Multilevel trust in international marketing of healthcare services: A five-country comparative study," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(6).
    6. Mattia Casula & Nandhini Rangarajan & Patricia Shields, 2021. "The potential of working hypotheses for deductive exploratory research," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 55(5), pages 1703-1725, October.
    7. Mojtaba Khaghani Milani & Mahmoud Reza Hashemi, 2020. "Extended grounded theory: a methodology to combine multiple disciplines," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 89-120, March.
    8. Alison Clements & Angela Nicholas & Karen E Martin & Susan Young, 2022. "Towards an Evidence-Based Model of Workplace Postvention," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-17, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:3:p:2221-:d:1047371. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.