↓ Skip to main content

Family Life and Social Medicine: Discourses and Discontents Surrounding Puebla’s Psychiatric Care

Overview of attention for article published in Culture, Medicine, and Psychiatry, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
86 Mendeley
Title
Family Life and Social Medicine: Discourses and Discontents Surrounding Puebla’s Psychiatric Care
Published in
Culture, Medicine, and Psychiatry, June 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11013-017-9539-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kathryn Law Hale

Abstract

Drawing on clinical data from 15 months of on-site participant observation in the only public psychiatric hospital in the state of Puebla, Mexico, this article advances our understanding of globalization in relation to psychiatry. I challenge the construction of psychiatry as only treating the individual patient and provide grounded doctor-patient-family member interaction in a Mexican psychiatric clinic in order to review what happens when doctors cannot interact with patients as atomized individuals even though in theory they are trained to think of patients that way. Challenged by severe structural constraints and bolstered by lessons from other nations' efforts at deinstitutionalization, psychiatrists in Puebla push to keep patients out of the inpatient wards and in their respective communities. To this end, psychiatrists call upon co-present kin who are identified both as the customer and part of the caretaking system outside the clinic. This modification to the visit structure changes the dynamic and content of clinical visits while doctors seamlessly respond to unspoken beliefs and values that are central to local life, ultimately showing that efforts to define a "global psychiatry" informed by global policy will fail because it cannot exist in a uniform way-interpersonal interaction and personal experience matters.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 86 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 15%
Student > Master 10 12%
Researcher 9 10%
Student > Bachelor 7 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Other 15 17%
Unknown 26 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 11 13%
Social Sciences 11 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 6%
Other 13 15%
Unknown 31 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 02 January 2018.
All research outputs
#3,505,282
of 23,906,448 outputs
Outputs from Culture, Medicine, and Psychiatry
#226
of 622 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#64,366
of 320,391 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Culture, Medicine, and Psychiatry
#3
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,906,448 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 622 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 320,391 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.