Swiss adolescents' and adults' perceptions of cannabis use : a qualitative study

Abstract Few studies have attempted to investigate the nature of adolescents' and adults' conceptions and perceptions of cannabis use. Our objectives were to explore adolescent and adult perception of use and misuse of cannabis, and their opinions and beliefs about the current legal context and preventive strategies. We used focus group dis¬cussions with four categories of stakeholders: younger (12-15 year old) adolescents, older (16-19 year old) adolescents, parents of teen¬agers and professionals working with young people. In some areas (legal framework, role of the media, importance of early preventive inter¬ventions), we found consensual attitudes and beliefs across the four groups of participants. In all four groups, participants did not have any consensual vision of the risks of cannabis use or the definition of misuse. In the area of the prevention of cannabis use/misuse, while parents focused on the potential role of professionals and the media, thus minimizing their own educa¬tional and preventive role, professionals stressed the importance of parental control and educa¬tion. Within the Swiss context, we conclude there exists an urgent need for information and clari¬fication of the issues linked with cannabis use and misuse directed at parents and professionals.

A Thematic Comparison of Eight Frameworks of Quality Criteria in Qualitative Health Research

Background: Despite the increasing incidences of the publication of assessment frameworks intending to establish the "standards" of the quality of qualitative research, the research conducted using such empirical methods are still facing difficulties in being published or recognised by funding agencies. Methods: We conducted a thematic content analysis of eight frameworks from psychology/psychiatry and general medicine. The frameworks and their criteria are then compared against each other. Findings: The results illustrated the difficulties in reaching consensus on the definition of quality criteria. This showed the differences between the frameworks from the point of views of the underlying epistemology and the criteria suggested. Discussion: The aforementioned differences reflect the diversity of paradigms implicitly referred to by the authors of the frameworks, although rarely explicitly mentioned in text. We conclude that the increase in qualitative research and publications has failed to overcome the difficulties in establishing shared criteria and the great heterogeneity of concepts raises methodological and epistemological problems.

2003-2013 : bilan de dix anx de recherche sur la parentalité lors de la naissance d'un enfant avec une fente oro-faciale

La naissance d'un enfant avec une fente oro-faciale est souvent vécue comme un événement à portée traumatique pour les parents, pouvant avoir un impact sur les représentations de l'enfant et la mise en place de la relation. Cet article propose un bilan des dix années de recherche lausannoise sur le développement de la parentalité et des liens précoces, auprès des familles d'enfants naissant avec une fente, depuis l'annonce du diagnostic jusqu'à l'âge préscolaire. Des aspects tels que les représentations parentales. les interactions précoces, ainsi que la qualité de l'attachement sont investigués.

Advance directives and the impact of timing. A qualitative study with Swiss general practitioners.

PRINCIPLES: Advance directives are seen as an important tool for documenting the wishes of patients who are no longer competent to make decisions in regards to their medical care. Due to their nature, approaching the subject of advance directives with a patient can be difficult for both the medical care provider and the patient. This paper focuses on general practitioners' perspectives regarding the timing at which this discussion should take place, as well as the advantages and disadvantages of the different moments. METHODS: In 2013, 23 semi-structured face-to-face interviews were performed with Swiss general practitioners. Interviews were analysed using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: In our sample, 23 general practitioners provided different options that they felt were appropriate moments: either (a) when the patient is still healthy, (b) when illness becomes predominant, or (c) when a patient has been transferred to a long-term care facility. Furthermore, general practitioners reported uncertainty and discomfort regarding initiating the discussion. CONCLUSION: The distinct approaches, perspectives and rationales show that there is no well-defined or "right" moment. However, participants often associated advance directives with death. This link caused discomfort and uncertainty, which led to hesitation and delay on the part of general practitioners. Therefore we recommend further training on how to professionally initiate a conversation about advance directives. Furthermore, based on our results and experience, we recommend an early approach with healthy patients paired with later regular updates as it seems to be the most effective way to inform patients about their end-of-life care options.