Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T17:58:25.867Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Social Process and the Assessment of a New Imaging Technique

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 March 2009

Stuart S. Blume
Stuart S. Blume
Affiliation:
University of Amsterdam
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Each group involved in the development of a new medical technology constantly assesses the value of the emergent technique in terms of the group’s own specific goals and conventions. The history of infrared thermography demonstrates the social nature of this assessment process.

Type
Special Section: Industry and the Generation of Technology, Part II
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 9 , Issue 3 , Summer 1993 , pp. 335 - 345
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1.Barnes, R. B.Thermography. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1964, 121, 34–48.Google Scholar
2.Bijker, W. The social construction of bakelite. In Bijker, W., Hughes, T. P., and Pinch, T. J. (eds.), The social construction of technological systems. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1986.Google Scholar
3.Blume, S. S.Insight and industry: The dynamics of technological change in medicine. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1992.Google Scholar
4.Cosh, J. A.Infra red detection in the assessment of rheumatoid arthritis. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine, 1966, 55 (suppl.), 88–92.Google Scholar
5.Dodd, G. D.Present status of thermography, ultrasound and mammography in breast cancer detection. Cancer, 1977, 39, 2796–2805.3.0.CO;2-0>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Dodd, G. D., Wallace, G. D., Freundlich, I. M., et al. Thermography and cancer of the breast. Cancer, 1969, 23, 797–802.Google Scholar
7.Dodd, G. D., Zermeno, A., Marsh, L., et al. New developments in breast thermography. Cancer, 1969, 24, 1212–21.3.0.CO;2-2>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Draper, J. W., & Jones, C. H.Thermal patterns of the female breast. British Journal of Radiology, 1969, 42, 401–10.Google Scholar
9.Gershon Cohen, J.Medical thermography. Scientific American, 1967, 216, 94–102.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.GershonCohen, J. Cohen, J., Berger, S. M., Haberman, J. D., & Brueschke, E. E.Advances in thermography and mammography. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1964, 125, 283–300.Google Scholar
11.Hamilton, B.Medical diagnostic imaging systems. New York: Frost & Sullivan, 1982.Google Scholar
12.Harris, D. L., Greening, W. P., & Aichroth, P. M.Infra red diagnosis of a lump in the breast. British Journal of Cancer, 1966, 20, 710–21.Google Scholar
13.Isard, H. J., Becker, W., Shilo, R., & Ostrum, B. J.Breast thermography after four years and 10,000 studies. American Journal of Roentgenology, 1972, 115, 811–21.Google Scholar
14.Isard, H. J., Ostrum, B. J., & Shilo, R.Thermography in breast carcinoma. Surgery Gynecology and Obstetrics, 1969, 128, 1289–93.Google Scholar
15.Jones, C. H., Greening, W. P., Davey, J. B., et al. Thermography of the female breast: A five year study in relation to the detection and prognosis of cancer. British Journal of Radiology, 1975, 48, 532–38.Google Scholar
16.Lorrimer, D. C. Personal communication.Google Scholar
17.Schwarz, M., & Thompson, M.Divided we stand: Redefining politics, technology and social choice. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1990.Google Scholar
18.Ziskin, M. C., Negin, M., Piner, C., & Lapayoker, M. C.Computer diagnosis of breast thermograms. Radiology, 1975, 115, 341–47.Google Scholar