Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T04:33:48.552Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Health technology assessment: a sociological commentary on reflexive innovation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 April 2004

Andrew Webster
Affiliation:
SATSU, University of York

Abstract

This study provides a sociological commentary on the current debates within health technology assessment (HTA), specifically in response to the approaches taken in France, The Netherlands, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. It argues that HTA is part of a wider reflexive innovation system that seeks to order current and prospective technologies. The study discusses the socio-political process of HTA priority setting, the rhetorical role of HTA, the localised and contingent use of HTA, and the policy gap between guidelines and practice. It argues for the development of new types of methodologies for assessment and for a stronger social embedding of HTA practice.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© 2004 Cambridge University Press

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

Barry A. 2001 Political machines. London: The Athlone Press;
Beck U. 1992 The risk society: Towards a new modernity. London: Sage;
Blume S. 1998 Early warning in the light of theories of technological change. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 14: 613623.Google Scholar
Brown N, Michael M. 2002 From authority to authenticity: Governance, transparency and biotechnology. Health Risk Society. 4: 259272.Google Scholar
Brown N, Rappert B, Webster A, eds. 2000 Contested futures. London: Ashgate;
Burrows R, Nettleton S. 2001 Reflexive modernisation and the emergence of wired self-help. In: Renninger KA, Shumar W, eds. Building virtual communities. New York: CUP;
Callon M. 2002 The increasing involvement of concerned groups in R&D policies: What lessons for public powers?. Paper presented at NPRnet Symposium, University of Sussex, March,
Faulkner A. 1997 In: Elston MA, ed. The Sociology of Medical Science and Technology. Oxford: Blackwell; 183207.
Foss L, Rotherberg K. 1987 The second medical revolution. London: Shambhala;
Giddens A. 1991 The consequences of modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press;
Heaton J. 2001 Technology and time: Home care regimes and technology-dependent children. ESRC Innovative Health technologies Programme: University of York;
de Jong M. 1999 Institutionalised criticism: The demonopolisation of scientific advising. Science Public Policy. 26: 193199.Google Scholar
Kuhn TS. 1970 The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: Chicago University Press;
Lupton D. 1999 Risk. London: Routledge;
Lynch M. 2000 Against reflexivity as an academic virtue and source of privileged knowledge. Theory Culture Society. 17: 2654.Google Scholar
Lyon D. 2002 Surveillance studies: Understanding visibility, mobility and the phenetic fix. Editorial. Surveillance Society. 1: 17.Google Scholar
Nowotny H, et al. 2000 Rethinking science. Cambridge: Polity Press;
Quoted in interview with Professor Zygmunt Bauman, 2002 Newsletter, British Sociological Association, October 2.
Robert G, Stevens A, Gabbay J. 1999 Early warning systems for identifying new healthcare technologies. Health Technol Assess. 13: 3.Google Scholar
Stehr N. 1994 Knowledge societies. London: Sage;
Strydom P. 1999 The civilisation of the gene: Biotechnological risk framed in the responsibility discourse. In: O'Mahony P, ed. Nature, risk and responsibility. Basingstoke: Macmillan; 2136.
Webster A, et al. 2002 Foresight as a tool for the management of knowledge and innovation. Report to European Commission: Brussels,
Webster A. 2002 Innovative health technologies and the social: Redefining health, medicine and the body. Curr Sociology. 50: 443457.Google Scholar
Webster A, Brown N. 2003 New medical technologies and society: Re-ordering life. Cambridge: Polity Press;