Health technology assessment: A sociological commentary on reflexive innovation

International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care

Volumn 20, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 61-66

  Webster, Andrew ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Health technology assessment; Sociology

Indexed keywords

ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS; PUBLIC POLICY; SOCIAL ASPECTS;

FRANCE; HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT (HTA); NETHERLANDS; SWEDEN;

HEALTH CARE;

FRANCE; HEALTH CARE INDUSTRY; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; HEALTH ECONOMICS; MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; NETHERLANDS; POLITICAL SYSTEM; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; REVIEW; SOCIOLOGY; STANDARDIZATION; SWEDEN; UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 2442651488     PISSN: 02664623     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0266462304000790     Document Type: Review

References (24)

1. Barry A. Political machines. London: The Athlone Press; 2001.
2. Beck U. The risk society: Towards a new modernity. London: Sage; 1992.
3. Blume S. Early warning in the light of theories of technological change. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1998;14:613-623.
4. Brown N, Michael M. From authority to authenticity: Governance, transparency and biotechnology. Health Risk Society. 2002;4:259-272.
5. Brown N, Rappert B, Webster A, eds. Contested futures. London: Ashgate; 2000.
6. Burrows R, Nettleton S. Reflexive modernisation and the emergence of wired self-help. In: Renninger KA, Shumar W, eds. Building virtual communities. New York: CUP; 2001.
7. Callon M. The increasing involvement of concerned groups in R&D policies: What lessons for public powers? Paper presented at NPRnet Symposium, University of Sussex, March, 2002.
8. Faulkner A. In: Elston, MA, ed. The Sociology of Medical Science and Technology. Oxford: Blackwell; 1997:183-207.
9. Foss L, Rotherberg K. The second medical revolution. London: Shambhala; 1987.
10. Giddens A. The consequences of modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press; 1991.
11. Heaton J. Technology and time: Home care regimes and technology-dependent children. ESRC Innovative Health technologies Programme: University of York; 2001.
12. de Jong M. Institutionalised criticism: The demonopolisation of scientific advising. Science Public Policy. 1999;26:193-199.
13. Kuhn TS. The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: Chicago University Press; 1970.
14. Lupton D. Risk. London: Routledge; 1999.
15. Lynch M. Against reflexivity as an academic virtue and source of privileged knowledge. Theory Culture Society. 2000;17: 26-54.
16. Lyon D. Surveillance studies: Understanding visibility, mobility and the phenetic fix. Editorial. Surveillance Society. 2002;1:1-7.
17. Nowotny H, et al. Rethinking science. Cambridge: Polity Press; 2000.
18. Quoted in interview with Professor Zygmunt Bauman, Newsletter, British Sociological Association, October 2002:2.
19. Robert G, Stevens A, Gabbay J. Early warning systems for identifying new healthcare technologies. Health Technol Assess. 1999;13:3.
20. Stehr N. Knowledge societies. London: Sage; 1994.
21. Strydom P. The civilisation of the gene: Biotechnological risk framed in the responsibility discourse. In: O'Mahony P, ed. Nature, risk and responsibility. Basingstoke: Macmillan; 1999:21-36.
22. Webster A, et al. Foresight as a tool for the management of knowledge and innovation. Report to European Commission: Brussels, 2002.
23. Webster A. Innovative health technologies and the social: Redefining health, medicine and the body. Curr Sociology. 2002;50:443-457.
24. Webster A, Brown N. New medical technologies and society: Re-ordering life. Cambridge: Polity Press; 2003.