• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
'They don't understand…you cut yourself in order to live.' Interpretative repertoires jointly constructing interactions between adult women who self-harm and professional caregivers.“他们不理解……你自残是为了活下去。”共同构建成年女性自伤行为者与专业照护者互动的阐释性剧目。
Int J Qual Stud Health Well-being. 2011;6(3). doi: 10.3402/qhw.v6i3.7254. Epub 2011 Sep 2.
2
Who is expected to make contact? Interpretative repertoires related to an intergroup encounter between Finnish majority mothers and immigrant mothers.谁有望进行接触?与芬兰多数族裔母亲和移民母亲之间的群体间相遇相关的解释性剧目。
Br J Soc Psychol. 2023 Jan;62(1):264-280. doi: 10.1111/bjso.12580. Epub 2022 Sep 22.
3
Repertoires of responsibility for diabetes management by adults with intellectual disabilities and those who support them.智障成年人及其支持者在糖尿病管理中的责任范围。
Sociol Health Illn. 2016 Nov;38(8):1243-1257. doi: 10.1111/1467-9566.12454. Epub 2016 Aug 22.
4
Talking via the child: discursively created interaction between parents and health care professionals in a pediatric oncology ward.通过儿童进行交流:儿科肿瘤病房中父母与医疗保健专业人员之间的话语互动。
J Fam Nurs. 2013 Feb;19(1):29-52. doi: 10.1177/1074840712462136. Epub 2012 Oct 17.
5
Hovering between Heaven and Hell: An Observational Study Focusing on the Interactions between One Woman with Schizophrenia, Dementia, and Challenging Behaviour and her Care Providers.徘徊于天堂与地狱之间:一项针对一名患有精神分裂症、痴呆症且有攻击性行为的女性与其护理人员之间互动的观察性研究。
Issues Ment Health Nurs. 2015 Jul;36(7):543-50. doi: 10.3109/01612840.2015.1007540.
6
'I want to die on my own terms': Dominant interpretative repertoires of 'a good death' in old age in Dutch newspapers.“我想按照自己的方式死去”:荷兰报纸上关于老年人“善终”的主导性解释话语
Soc Sci Med. 2022 Oct;311:115361. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.115361. Epub 2022 Sep 8.
7
Interpretative repertoires of long-term weight management: negotiating accountability and explaining success.长期体重管理的解释性话术:协商责任归属与解释成功原因
Psychol Health. 2023 Nov-Dec;38(12):1702-1724. doi: 10.1080/08870446.2022.2043316. Epub 2022 Feb 24.
8
[A proposal for reforming psychologists' training in France and in the European Union].[关于法国及欧盟心理学家培训改革的一项提议]
Encephale. 2009 Feb;35(1):18-24. doi: 10.1016/j.encep.2007.11.008. Epub 2008 Apr 2.
9
'It's more than sadness': The Discursive Construction of Depression on Australian Depression Websites.“不仅仅是悲伤”:澳大利亚抑郁网站中对抑郁的话语建构。
Qual Health Res. 2022 Jun;32(7):1185-1196. doi: 10.1177/10497323221102240. Epub 2022 May 18.
10
Interpretative repertoires of medication among the oldest-old.最年长者用药的诠释方式
Soc Sci Med. 2000 Jun;50(12):1843-50. doi: 10.1016/s0277-9536(99)00421-9.

引用本文的文献

1
Person-centred suicide prevention: key elements from the perspective of people living with suicidality.以个人为中心的自杀预防:来自有自杀倾向者视角的关键要素
Int J Qual Stud Health Well-being. 2025 Dec;20(1):2549752. doi: 10.1080/17482631.2025.2549752. Epub 2025 Aug 28.
2
Epistemic citizenship under structural siege: a meta-analysis drawing on 544 voices of service user experiences in Nordic mental health services.结构围困下的认知公民身份:一项基于北欧心理健康服务中544名服务使用者经历的元分析。
Front Psychiatry. 2023 Jun 2;14:1156835. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1156835. eCollection 2023.
3
Finding an existential place to rest: enabling well-being in young adults.寻找一个存在的地方休息:促进年轻人的幸福感。
Int J Qual Stud Health Well-being. 2022 Dec;17(1):2109812. doi: 10.1080/17482631.2022.2109812.
4
A palliative care approach in psychiatry: clinical implications.精神病学中的姑息治疗方法:临床意义。
BMC Med Ethics. 2020 Apr 19;21(1):29. doi: 10.1186/s12910-020-00472-8.
5
Quality of interactions influences everyday life in psychiatric inpatient care--patients' perspectives.互动质量影响精神科住院护理中的日常生活——患者视角
Int J Qual Stud Health Well-being. 2016 Jan 22;11:29897. doi: 10.3402/qhw.v11.29897. eCollection 2016.

本文引用的文献

1
Self-harm: what's the problem? A literature review of the factors affecting attitudes towards self-harm.自伤:问题在哪里?影响自伤态度因素的文献综述。
J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2010 Oct;17(8):732-40. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2850.2010.01600.x. Epub 2010 Jun 22.
2
Deliberate self-harm and associated factors in 17-year-old Swedish students.17 岁瑞典学生的蓄意自伤行为及相关因素。
Scand J Public Health. 2011 Feb;39(1):17-25. doi: 10.1177/1403494810382941. Epub 2010 Sep 16.
3
Health-care staff attitudes towards self-harm patients.医护人员对自残患者的态度。
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2010 Aug;44(8):713-20. doi: 10.3109/00048671003671015.
4
[What is self-harm?].[什么是自我伤害?]
Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2009 Apr 16;129(8):754-8. doi: 10.4045/tidsskr.08.0454.
5
Community psychiatric nurses' experience of working with people who engage in deliberate self-harm.社区精神科护士与故意自伤患者合作的经历。
Int J Ment Health Nurs. 2008 Jun;17(3):153-61. doi: 10.1111/j.1447-0349.2008.00533.x.
6
Deliberate self-harm within an international community sample of young people: comparative findings from the Child & Adolescent Self-harm in Europe (CASE) Study.国际青年群体样本中的蓄意自伤行为:欧洲儿童与青少年自伤行为(CASE)研究的比较结果
J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2008 Jun;49(6):667-77. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2008.01879.x. Epub 2008 Mar 10.
7
'Then I just showed her my arms . . .' Bodily sensations in moments of alienation related to self-injurious behaviour. A hermeneutic phenomenological study.“然后我只是给她看了我的手臂……”与自我伤害行为相关的疏离时刻的身体感觉。一项诠释现象学研究。
J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2007 Sep;14(6):587-97. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2850.2007.01150.x.
8
Encounters in a locked psychiatric ward environment.在封闭的精神科病房环境中的遭遇。
J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2007 Jun;14(4):366-72. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2850.2007.01091.x.
9
Multiple meanings of self harm: a critical review.自我伤害的多重含义:一项批判性综述。
Int J Ment Health Nurs. 2003 Sep;12(3):177-85. doi: 10.1046/j.1440-0979.2003.00287.x.
10
Self-harm and the words that bind: a critique of common perspectives.自我伤害与相关表述:对常见观点的批判
J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2007 Apr;14(2):172-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2850.2007.01060.x.

“他们不理解……你自残是为了活下去。”共同构建成年女性自伤行为者与专业照护者互动的阐释性剧目。

'They don't understand…you cut yourself in order to live.' Interpretative repertoires jointly constructing interactions between adult women who self-harm and professional caregivers.

机构信息

Department of Nursing, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.

出版信息

Int J Qual Stud Health Well-being. 2011;6(3). doi: 10.3402/qhw.v6i3.7254. Epub 2011 Sep 2.

DOI:10.3402/qhw.v6i3.7254
PMID:21897829
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3166521/
Abstract

The aim of the study was to illuminate interpretative repertoires that jointly construct the interaction between adult women who self-harm and professional caregivers in psychiatric inpatient care. Participant observations and informal interviews were conducted among six women who self-harm and their professional caregivers in two psychiatric inpatient wards, and analysed using the concept of interpretative repertoires from the discipline of discursive psychology. The analysis revealed four interpretative repertoires that jointly constructed the interaction. The professional caregivers used a "fostering repertoire" and a "supportive repertoire" and the women who self-harmed used a "victim repertoire" and an "expert repertoire." The women and the caregivers were positioned and positioned themselves and people around them within and among these interpretative repertoires to make sense of their experiences of the interaction. It was necessary to consider each woman's own life chances and knowledge about herself and her needs. The participants made it clear that it was essential for them to be met with respect as individuals. Professional caregivers need to work in partnership with individuals who self-harm-experts by profession collaborating with experts by experience. Caregivers need to look beyond behavioural symptoms and recognise each individual's possibilities for agency.

摘要

这项研究的目的是阐明解释性方案,这些方案共同构建了在精神病住院治疗中,自残的成年女性和专业护理人员之间的互动。通过参与者观察和非正式访谈,在两个精神病住院病房中对六名自残的女性及其专业护理人员进行了研究,并使用话语心理学学科的解释性方案概念进行了分析。分析揭示了共同构建互动的四个解释性方案。专业护理人员使用了“培养方案”和“支持方案”,自残的女性使用了“受害者方案”和“专家方案”。女性和护理人员在这些解释性方案中对自己和周围的人进行定位和自我定位,以理解他们的互动体验。有必要考虑每个女性自身的生活机会以及她对自己和自己需求的了解。参与者明确表示,他们必须作为个体受到尊重,这是至关重要的。专业护理人员需要与自残者合作——他们是专业领域的专家,与经验领域的专家合作。护理人员需要超越行为症状,认识到每个人的代理可能性。