↓ Skip to main content

“Sticky” Brains and Sticky Encounters in a U.S. Pediatric Pain Clinic

Overview of attention for article published in Culture, Medicine, and Psychiatry, October 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
90 Mendeley
Title
“Sticky” Brains and Sticky Encounters in a U.S. Pediatric Pain Clinic
Published in
Culture, Medicine, and Psychiatry, October 2011
DOI 10.1007/s11013-011-9237-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mara Buchbinder

Abstract

In the U.S. multidisciplinary pediatric pain clinic where I conducted 18 months of fieldwork, a widely held explanatory model tied the neurobiology of intractable pain to certain features of pervasive developmental disorders (PDD) such as concrete thinking, an interest in details, and hyper-attentiveness. Clinicians used terms such as "sticky brains" and "sticky neurons" to describe the perseverative thoughts and quirky behavior that characterized a sizable subset of the program's chronic pain patients who were believed to show signs of PDD, and consequently, did not respond well to treatment. Drawing on observations of clinical consultations, team meetings, and interviews with clinicians and families, I examine the meta-discursive processes by which clinical difficulties were inscribed onto difficult patients. Specifically, I demonstrate how discourse on sticky brains worked to re-classify challenging patients as psychologically abnormal, rationalizing their failed response to standard treatment. I argue that 'stickiness' provides an appropriate metaphor not only for a particular neurobiological configuration, but also for challenging clinical encounters. By illuminating the interactional processes through which clinical difficulties are managed, interpreted, and explained, the paper advances anthropological theorizing on the performative work of diagnosis and institutionalized misrecognition.

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 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Unknown 89 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 20%
Student > Master 14 16%
Student > Bachelor 9 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 7%
Student > Postgraduate 5 6%
Other 17 19%
Unknown 21 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 22 24%
Psychology 18 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 9%
Neuroscience 3 3%
Other 7 8%
Unknown 23 26%
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 19 October 2011.
All research outputs
#16,223,992
of 23,906,448 outputs
Outputs from Culture, Medicine, and Psychiatry
#525
of 622 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,156
of 141,943 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Culture, Medicine, and Psychiatry
#4
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,906,448 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 141,943 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.