IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v73y2011i6p922-928.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Talking about colds and flu: The lay diagnosis of two common illnesses among older British people

Author

Listed:
  • Prior, Lindsay
  • Evans, Meirion R.
  • Prout, Hayley

Abstract

This paper reports on a study of the ways in which 54 older people in South Wales (UK) talk about the symptoms and causes of cold and influenza (flu). The study was designed to understand why older people might reject or accept the offer of seasonal flu vaccine, and in the course of the interviews respondents were also asked to express their views about the nature and causes of the two key illnesses. The latter are among the most common infections in human beings. In terms of the biomedical paradigm the common cold is caused by numerous respiratory viruses, whilst flu is caused by the influenza virus. Medical diagnosis is usually made on clinical grounds without laboratory confirmation. Symptoms of flu include sudden onset of fever and cough, and colds are characterized by sneezing, sore throat, and runny nose, but in practice the symptoms often overlap. In this study we examine the degree by which the views of lay people with respect to both diagnosis and epidemiology diverge with that which is evident in biomedical discourse. Our results indicate that whilst most of the identified symptoms are common to lay and professional people, the former integrate symptoms into a markedly different observational frame from the latter. And as far as causation is concerned it is clear that lay people emphasize the role of 'resistance' and 'immunity' at least as much as 'infection' in accounting for the onset of colds and flu. The data are analyzed using novel methods that focus on the co-occurrence of concepts and are displayed as semantic networks. As well as reporting on its findings the authors draw out some implications of the study for social scientific and policy discussions concerning lay diagnosis, lay expertise and the concept of an expert patient.

Suggested Citation

  • Prior, Lindsay & Evans, Meirion R. & Prout, Hayley, 2011. "Talking about colds and flu: The lay diagnosis of two common illnesses among older British people," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 73(6), pages 922-928, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:73:y:2011:i:6:p:922-928
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953610007987
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fox, N.J. & Ward, K.J. & O'Rourke, A.J., 2005. "The 'expert patient': empowerment or medical dominance? The case of weight loss, pharmaceutical drugs and the Internet," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 60(6), pages 1299-1309, March.
    2. McCombie, S. C., 1987. "Folk flu and viral syndrome: An epidemiological perspective," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 25(9), pages 987-993, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Locock, Louise & Nettleton, Sarah & Kirkpatrick, Susan & Ryan, Sara & Ziebland, Sue, 2016. "‘I knew before I was told’: Breaches, cues and clues in the diagnostic assemblage," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 85-92.
    2. Jutel, Annemarie & Banister, Elizabeth, 2013. "“I was pretty sure I had the 'flu”: Qualitative description of confirmed-influenza symptoms," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 49-55.
    3. Keys, Hunter M. & Kaiser, Bonnie N. & Kohrt, Brandon A. & Khoury, Nayla M. & Brewster, Aimée-Rika T., 2012. "Idioms of distress, ethnopsychology, and the clinical encounter in Haiti's Central Plateau," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(3), pages 555-564.

    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. Philippe Batifoulier & John Latsis & Jacques Merchiers, 2010. "Les priorités de la prise en charge financière des soins. Une approche par la philosophie du besoin," EconomiX Working Papers 2010-2, University of Paris Nanterre, EconomiX.
    2. Chandwani, Rajesh & Edacherian, Saneesh & Sud, Mukesh, 2019. "Whose Empowerment? National Digital Infrastructure and India’s Healthcare sector," IIMA Working Papers WP 2019-02-01, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Research and Publication Department.
    3. Adams, Samantha A., 2011. "Sourcing the crowd for health services improvement: The reflexive patient and "share-your-experience" websites," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(7), pages 1069-1076, April.
    4. Bernardi, Roberta & Wu, Philip F., 2022. "Online health communities and the patient-doctor relationship: An institutional logics perspective," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 314(C).
    5. Brothers, Sarah, 2019. "A good “doctor” is hard to find: Assessing uncredentialed expertise in assisted injection," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 237(C), pages 1-1.
    6. Scavarda, Alice & Ariel Cascio, M., 2022. "Embracing and rejecting the medicalization of autism in Italy," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 294(C).
    7. Read, John, 2008. "Schizophrenia, drug companies and the internet," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 99-109, January.
    8. Kuchinskaya, Olga & Parker, Lisa S., 2018. "‘Recurrent losers unite’: Online forums, evidence-based activism, and pregnancy loss," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 216(C), pages 74-80.
    9. Greenfield, Geva & Pliskin, Joseph S. & Feder-Bubis, Paula & Wientroub, Shlomo & Davidovitch, Nadav, 2012. "Patient–physician relationships in second opinion encounters – The physicians’ perspective," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(7), pages 1202-1212.
    10. Dedding, Christine & van Doorn, Roesja & Winkler, Lex & Reis, Ria, 2011. "How will e-health affect patient participation in the clinic? A review of e-health studies and the current evidence for changes in the relationship between medical professionals and patients," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 49-53, January.
    11. Salant, Talya & Santry, Heena P., 2006. "Internet marketing of bariatric surgery: Contemporary trends in the medicalization of obesity," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(10), pages 2445-2457, May.
    12. Stacey, Clare Louise & Henderson, Stuart & MacArthur, Kelly R. & Dohan, Daniel, 2009. "Demanding patient or demanding encounter?: A case study of a cancer clinic," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 729-737, September.
    13. Menon, Alka V., 2017. "Do online reviews diminish physician authority? The case of cosmetic surgery in the U.S," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 181(C), pages 1-8.
    14. Will, Catherine M. & Weiner, Kate, 2015. "The drugs don't sell: DIY heart health and the over-the-counter statin experience," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 280-288.
    15. McDonald, Ruth & Cheraghi-Sohi, Sudeh & Sanders, Caroline & Ashcroft, Darren, 2010. "Professional status in a changing world: The case of medicines use reviews in English community pharmacy," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 71(3), pages 451-458, August.
    16. Thomas, Felicity & Aggleton, Peter & Anderson, Jane, 2010. "'Experts', 'partners' and 'fools': Exploring agency in HIV treatment seeking among African migrants in London," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 70(5), pages 736-743, March.
    17. Frank, Vibeke Asmussen & Bjerge, Bagga, 2011. "Empowerment in drug treatment: Dilemmas in implementing policy in welfare institutions," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 73(2), pages 201-208, July.
    18. Lehoux, Pascale & Daudelin, Genevieve & Demers-Payette, Olivier & Boivin, Antoine, 2009. "Fostering deliberations about health innovation: What do we want to know from publics?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 68(11), pages 2002-2009, June.
    19. Lemire, Marc & Sicotte, Claude & Paré, Guy, 2008. "Internet use and the logics of personal empowerment in health," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(1), pages 130-140, October.
    20. Reilley, Jacob & Pflueger, Dane & Huber, Christian, 2024. "A typology of evaluative health platforms: Commercial interests and their implications for patient voice," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 350(C).

    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:eee:socmed:v:73:y:2011:i:6:p:922-928. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    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.