↓ Skip to main content

Psychiatry in the age of neuroscience: the impact on clinical practice and lives of patients

Overview of attention for article published in Poiesis & Praxis, December 2008
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
9 Mendeley
Title
Psychiatry in the age of neuroscience: the impact on clinical practice and lives of patients
Published in
Poiesis & Praxis, December 2008
DOI 10.1007/s10202-008-0057-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elleke Landeweer, Tineke Abma, Jolijn Santegoeds, Guy Widdershoven

Abstract

Due to the progress being made in the neurosciences, higher expectations for the use of medication, even against the patient's will, are arising in mental hospitals. In this article, we will discuss whether the neurosciences and new psychopharmacological solutions really support patients who suffer from mental illnesses. To answer this question, we will focus on the perspective of patients and their experiences with psychiatric (coercive) treatments. The analysis of one person's story shows that other issues besides appropriate medication are important for recovery from a mental illness. In daily life, issues such as coping, rehabilitation and social support are of major importance for a patient suffering from psychiatric disease. Thus, although progress in the neurosciences is a positive development for clinical practice, it does not mean that (coercive) medication alone will carry a patient into recovery. A patient's recovery is dependent, not only upon the process of finding the appropriate medication and trust between the psychiatrist and the patient, but also upon relational aspects, such as being recognised as a person, belonging, accepting responsibilities, developing friendships and trusting others. These findings lead to the conclusion that dealing with psychiatric diseases is more complex than what the biomedical model of neuroscience suggests and that one should include the social context of the patient in the recovery process.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 2 22%
Unknown 7 78%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 33%
Other 3 33%
Researcher 2 22%
Student > Master 1 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Philosophy 3 33%
Psychology 3 33%
Arts and Humanities 1 11%
Social Sciences 1 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 11%
Other 0 0%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 May 2017.
All research outputs
#18,547,867
of 22,971,207 outputs
Outputs from Poiesis & Praxis
#33
of 41 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#154,566
of 165,993 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Poiesis & Praxis
#3
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,971,207 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 41 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.9. This one scored the same or higher as 8 of them.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 165,993 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.