Sarah Bigi

Dr. Sarah Bigi

Department of Linguistic Sciences and Foreign Literatures, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, 20123 Milan, Italy
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

16Years (2011-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
20 March 2017 in Discourse Studies
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
FMFabrizio Macagno
Fabrizio Macagno
SBSarah Bigi
Sarah Bigi
In this article, we describe the notion of dialogue move intended as the minimal unit for the analysis of dialogues. We propose an approach to discourse analysis based on the pragmatic idea that the joint dialogical intentions are also co-constructed through the individual moves and the higher-order communicative intentions that the interlocutors pursue. In this view, our goal is to bring to light the pragmatic structure of a dialogue as a complex net of dialogical goals (such as persuasion, deliberation, information-sharing, etc.), which represent the communicative purposes that the interlocutors intend to achieve through their utterances. Dialogue moves are shown to represent the necessary interpretive link between the general description of the dialogical context or type and the syntactical analysis of the sentences expressed by the individual utterances. In the concluding part of this article, we show how this method can be used and further developed for analyzing various types of real-life dialogues, outlining possible uses and lines of empirical research based thereon.

1 August 2012 in Journal of Pragmatics
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
SBSarah Bigi
Sarah Bigi
SGSara Greco
Sara Greco

6 June 2017 in Frontiers in Psychology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
GGGuendalina Graffigna
Guendalina Graffigna
SBSerena Barello
Serena Barello
Giuseppe RivaGiuseppe Riva
Giuseppe Riva
MSMariarosaria Savarese
Mariarosaria Savarese
JMJulia Menichetti
Julia Menichetti
ABA. Claudio Bosio
A. Claudio Bosio
Today we observe a gap between theory and practices of patient engagement. If both scholars and health practitioners do agree on the urgency to realize patient engagement, no shared guidelines exist so far to orient clinical practice. Despite a supportive policy context, progress to achieve greater patient engagement is patchy and slow and often concentrated at the level of policy regulation without dialoguing with practitioners from the clinical field as well as patients and families. Though individual clinicians, care teams and health organizations may be interested and deeply committed to engage patients and family members in the medical course, they may lack clarity about how to achieve this goal. This contributes to a wide “system” inertia – really difficult to be overcome - and put at risk any form of innovation in this filed. As a result, patient engagement risk today to be a buzz words, rather than a real guidance for practice. To make the field clearer, we promoted an Italian Consensus Conference on Patient Engagement (ICCPE) in order to provide recommendations for the provision of effective patient engagement interventions. This document reports on the main results rising from this process. To summarize, the ICCPE advised the importance of “fertilizing a patient engagement ecosystem”: an oversimplifying approach to patient engagement promotion appears the result of a common illusion. Patient “disengagement” is a symptom that needs a more holistic and complex approach to solve its underlined causes. Main recommendations about the principles to promote a patient engagement ecosystem are provided

18 July 2023 in Cancers
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MLMario Luppi
Mario Luppi
EBEleonora Borelli
Eleonora Borelli
FGFabio Gilioli
Fabio Gilioli
SBSarah Bigi
Sarah Bigi
CMClaudia Mucciarini
Claudia Mucciarini
LPLeonardo Potenza
Leonardo Potenza
The early referral to palliative care (PC) represents a successful value-based model with proven benefits regarding the quality of life and clinical outcomes for advanced cancer patients and their caregivers. Yet, its provision remains typically confined to the last weeks of life as per the historical, late PC model. The stigma according to which PC represents end-of-life care has been identified as the root of the problem. To explore the presence and effects of the stigma in a clinical context, we surveyed 78 patients and 110 caregivers (mean age: 71.7 and 60.7, respectively) on early PC to study what their perception of PC was before their direct experience. The responses were analyzed through a qualitative descriptive approach. The participants explicitly mentioned a lack of knowledge about PC (53% of the sample), which they identified also among physicians and the population (13%); an identification of PC with the late PC model (53%); and a detrimental reaction to the proposal of an early PC referral (83%). However, the participants explicitly mentioned that a direct experience of early PC allowed for an acquired awareness of early PC meaning and benefits (52%), as well as a comprehension of its differences with late PC (34%); the regret for the delayed referral (8%); the perception of the word “palliative” as a barrier (21%); and the belief that early PC should be part of the cancer routine practice (25%). A comprehensive multi-level intervention is necessary for a widespread understanding of the essence of anticipated PC.

18 January 2022 in Cancers
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
LPLeonardo Potenza
Leonardo Potenza
EBEleonora Borelli
Eleonora Borelli
SBSarah Bigi
Sarah Bigi
DGDavide Giusti
Davide Giusti
GLGiuseppe Longo
Giuseppe Longo
MLMario Luppi
Mario Luppi
Background: Several novel targeted therapies seem to improve the outcome of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients. Nonetheless, the 5-year survival rate remains below 40%, and the trajectory of the disease remains physically and emotionally challenging, with little time to make relevant decisions. For patients with advanced solid tumors, the integration of early palliative care (EPC) with standard oncologic care a few weeks after diagnosis has demonstrated several benefits. However, this model is underutilized in patients with hematologic malignancies. Methods: In this article, we analyze the palliative care (PC) needs of AML patients, examine the operational aspects of an integrated model, and review the evidence in favor of EPC integration in the AML course. Results: AML patients have a high burden of physical and psychological symptoms and high use of avoidant coping strategies. Emerging studies, including a phase III randomized controlled trial, have reported that EPC is feasible for inpatients and outpatients, improves quality of life (QoL), promotes adaptive coping, reduces psychological symptoms, and enhances the quality of end-of-life care. Conclusions: EPC should become the new standard of care for AML patients. However, this raises issues about the urgent development of adequate programs of education to increase timely access to PC.

12 September 2021 in The Oncologist
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
EBEleonora Borelli
Eleonora Borelli
SBSarah Bigi
Sarah Bigi
LPLeonardo Potenza
Leonardo Potenza
SESonia Eliardo
Sonia Eliardo
FAFabrizio Artioli
Fabrizio Artioli
EBElena Bandieri
Elena Bandieri
Background: Little is known about the underlying mechanisms through which early palliative care (EPC) improves multiple outcomes in patients with cancer and their caregivers. The aim of this study was to qualitatively and quantitatively analyze patients’ and caregivers’ thoughts and emotional and cognitive perceptions about the disease prior to and during the EPC intervention, and in the end of life, following the exposure to EPC. Materials and Methods: Seventy-seven patients with advanced cancer and 48 caregivers from two cancer centers participated in semistructured interviews. Their reports were qualitatively and quantitatively analyzed by the means of the grounded theory and a text-analysis program. Results: Participants reported their past as overwhelmed by unmanaged symptoms, with detrimental physical and psychosocial consequences. The EPC intervention allowed a prompt resolution of symptoms and of their consequences and empowerment, an appreciation of its multidimensional approach, its focus on the person and its environment, and the need for EPC for oncologic populations. Patients reported that conversations with the EPC team increased their acceptance of end of life and their expectation of a painless future. Quantitative analysis revealed higher use of Negative Affects (p < .001) and Biological Processes words (p < .001) when discussing the past; Agency words when discussing the present (p < .001); Positive Affects (p < .001), Optimism (p = .002), and Insight Thinking words (p < .001) when discussing the present and the future; and Anxiety (p = .002) and Sadness words (p = .003) when discussing the future. Conclusion: Overall, participants perceived EPC to be beneficial. Our findings suggest that emotional and cognitive processes centered on communication underlie the benefits experienced by participants on EPC. Implications for Practice: By qualitative and quantitative analyses of the emotional and cognitive perceptions of cancer patients and their caregivers about their experiences before and during EPC interventions, this study may help physicians/nurses to focus on the disease perception by patients/caregivers and the benefits of EPC, as a standard practice. The analysis of words used by patients/caregivers provides a proxy for their psychological condition and support in tailoring an EPC intervention, based on individual needs. This study highlights that the relationship of the triad EPC team/patients/caregivers may rise as a therapeutic tool, allowing increasing awareness and progressive acceptance of the idea of death.