| Title |
Pain and its Metaphors: A Dialogical Approach
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Medical Humanities, April 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10912-011-9139-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Stephen Loftus |
| Abstract |
Most health professionals are unaware of the extent to which aspects of language, such as metaphor, influence their practice. Sensitivity to metaphor can deepen our understanding of healthcare and, arguably, improve its quality. This is because metaphors, and the linguisticality of which they are a part, shape medical practice in important ways. Examples are the metaphors used in pain management. By exploring the dialogical tension between such metaphors, we can better understand the ways in which they influence medical practice. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 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 Kingdom | 4 | 17% |
| United States | 3 | 13% |
| Ireland | 2 | 8% |
| Spain | 1 | 4% |
| Austria | 1 | 4% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 4% |
| France | 1 | 4% |
| Australia | 1 | 4% |
| Norway | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 9 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 16 | 67% |
| Scientists | 5 | 21% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| Korea, Republic of | 1 | 1% |
| Hong Kong | 1 | 1% |
| India | 1 | 1% |
| Australia | 1 | 1% |
| Nigeria | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 81 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 13% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 10 | 11% |
| Other | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 22 | 25% |
| Unknown | 19 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 22% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 14 | 16% |
| Arts and Humanities | 10 | 11% |
| Linguistics | 8 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 9% |
| Other | 6 | 7% |
| Unknown | 23 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. 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 21 January 2024.
All research outputs
#1,611,227
of 25,732,188 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Humanities
#20
of 426 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,450
of 121,330 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Humanities
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,732,188 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 426 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 121,330 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them