↓ Skip to main content

A Gestão Autônoma da Medicação: uma intervenção analisadora de serviços em saúde mental

Overview of attention for article published in Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, October 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A Gestão Autônoma da Medicação: uma intervenção analisadora de serviços em saúde mental
Published in
Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, October 2013
DOI 10.1590/s1413-81232013001000013
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rosana Teresa Onocko-Campos, Eduardo Passos, Analice de Lima Palombini, Deivisson Vianna Dantas dos Santos, Sabrina Stefanello, Laura Lamas Martins Gonçalves, Paula Milward de Andrade, Luana Ribeiro Borges

Abstract

In a context of high rates of medicalization of the population and in light of the scantly critical use of psychiatric medications in mental health services, this paper reports aspects of a qualitative study that had the opportunity to intervene in care practices in three major Brazilian cities. Following the principle of Brazilian Psychiatric Reform championing users' rights to participate in decisions about their treatment, the research intervened in psychosocial care centers (CAPS) seeking the empowerment of the users regarding the use of drugs in their therapeutic projects. Interviews were conducted and focus groups set up. From this recorded material, the paper analyzed some situations that, among other things, attested to the difficulty of avoiding the exercise of power over users via the administration of psychotropic drugs. Little dialogue about drugs, and the existence of stigmatization spaces where user rights are inhibited or "accepted with caution," was also detected in the services surveyed.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 3%
Unknown 58 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 30%
Student > Bachelor 9 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Professor 3 5%
Researcher 3 5%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 16 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 16 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 18%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 7%
Social Sciences 4 7%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 18 30%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 26 September 2021.
All research outputs
#12,212,249
of 19,833,325 outputs
Outputs from Ciência & Saúde Coletiva
#322
of 862 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,032
of 212,127 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ciência & Saúde Coletiva
#7
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,833,325 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 862 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 212,127 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 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 50% of its contemporaries.