“Co-production” is becoming an increasingly popular term in policymaking, governance, and research. While the shift from engagement and involvement to co-production in health care holds the promise of revolutionising health services and research, it is not always evident what counts as co-production: what is being produced, under what circumstances, and with what implications for participants. We discuss these questions and propose that co-production can be understood as an exploratory space and a generative process that leads to different, and sometimes unexpected, forms of knowledge, values, and social relations. By opening up this discussion, we hope to stimulate future debates on co-production as well as draw out ways of thinking differently about collaboration and participation in health care and research.Part of the title of this article is inspired by the book “The Social Construction of What?” by Ian Hacking (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 2000).

No abstract

Globalization of ADHD and the rise of cognitive enhancement have raised fresh concerns about the validity of ADHD diagnosis and the ethics of stimulant drug treatment. We review the literature on these two emerging phenomena, with a focus on the corresponding social, scientific and ethical debates over the universality of ADHD and the use of stimulant drug treatments in a global population of children and adolescents. Drawing on this literature, we reflect on the importance of ethically informed, ecologically sensitive clinical practices in relation to ADHD diagnosis and treatment.

No abstract

Drawing on medical anthropology and science and technology studies, I present a case study of the diagnosis of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in Portugal. In a country where ADHD is a relatively recent medical category, still undergoing validation, the diagnosis is not primarily bound to an evidence-making role, and its epidemiology remains largely unknown. Notwithstanding, the diagnosis has been carried out by child psychiatrists and developmental clinicians who describe it as the most prevalent disorder that affects school-aged children and adolescents. In this article, I examine the global data, local diagnostic protocols, and clinical practices that are adapted and selectively mobilized in the making of the diagnosis, in a context in which making ADHD evident is at stake. The findings show that what counts as ADHD and what it means in each setting varies, and that the diagnosis may be understood as a situated process.