↓ Skip to main content

“It’s Not Like Therapy”: Patient-Inmate Perspectives on Jail Psychiatric Services

Overview of attention for article published in Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
10 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 Mendeley
Title
“It’s Not Like Therapy”: Patient-Inmate Perspectives on Jail Psychiatric Services
Published in
Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, August 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10488-017-0821-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Leah A. Jacobs, Sequoia N. J. Giordano

Abstract

Jails may serve an important public health function by treating individuals with psychiatric problems. However, scholars debate the service qualities that can best achieve this aim. Some suggest the possibility of comprehensive psychiatric services in jails, while others recommend a narrower focus on basic elements of care (assessments, medication management, and crisis intervention). To date, this debate remains uninformed by service recipients. This qualitative study addresses this gap by illuminating patient-inmate perspectives on jail psychiatric services. Patient-inmate experiences indicate that the jail environment is incongruent with the provision of comprehensive psychiatric services. Thus, program administrators would best serve patient-inmates by strengthening basic services and connections to community-based providers who can provide comprehensive and effective care.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users 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 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 76 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 12 16%
Student > Master 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 7%
Lecturer 4 5%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 31 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 17 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 8%
Social Sciences 5 7%
Arts and Humanities 2 3%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 33 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 07 March 2023.
All research outputs
#2,322,086
of 25,436,226 outputs
Outputs from Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research
#76
of 716 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,113
of 325,819 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research
#4
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,436,226 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 716 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 325,819 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 86% 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 63% of its contemporaries.