| Title |
Effectively addressing addiction requires changing the language of addiction
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Public Health Policy, November 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1057/jphp.2013.44 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Linda Richter, Susan E Foster |
| Abstract |
Public knowledge and attitudes about addiction are largely inconsistent with scientific evidence. The gap between the facts and public and professional perceptions is due in part to the language used to describe the disease and those who have it. A key step in modifying public attitudes and improving how health professionals and policymakers address addiction is to better align the language of addiction with the scientific evidence. Unless we clarify the language, those with the disease will continue to experience the stigma associated with it and attempts to deliver comprehensive and effective evidence-based prevention, treatment, and disease management will be profoundly compromised. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 29% |
| Egypt | 1 | 14% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 3 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 43% |
| Members of the public | 3 | 43% |
| Scientists | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 2 | 5% |
| United States | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 35 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 21% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 16% |
| Researcher | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 6 | 16% |
| Unknown | 6 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 10 | 26% |
| Social Sciences | 9 | 24% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 11% |
| Arts and Humanities | 3 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 8 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 18 May 2014.
All research outputs
#3,091,156
of 25,382,360 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Public Health Policy
#139
of 856 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,509
of 223,646 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Public Health Policy
#4
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,360 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 856 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its peers.
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 223,646 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.