Making sure. A comparative micro-analysis of diagnostic instruments in medical practice

Schubert, Cornelius

doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.05.032

Cited by 47 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The case studies provided by these authors illustrate that embodied diagnostic knowledge is an essential element of diagnosis, even in contexts where a great deal of diagnostic work has been ‘delegated’ to technology. In a similar vein, Schubert (2011) examines the relationship between diagnostic technologies and embodied skills, illustrating that the latter are configured by diagnostic tools such as the stethoscope. It is by working with tools that clinicians acquire many of the embodied perceptual skills that render them sensitive to otherwise indiscernible elements of the patient.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Such tools prompt clinicians to acquire an embodied diagnostic knowledge, without which the tools would be useless and the patient would remain ‘unknowable’. Schubert (2011: 856) argues that diagnostic tools such as the stethoscope form part of ‘diagnostic ensembles in which bodies, tools, and knowledge are mutually configured’.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Authors have explored the social construction of diagnostic categories (Armstrong 2011, Salter et al . 2011), the consequences of diagnosis (Singh 2011, Trundle 2011, Willig 2011), and the diagnostic process itself (Schubert 2011). This last aspect of diagnosis, diagnosis‐as‐process, refers to the practices by which an afflicted individual's symptoms and signs obtain coherence in terms of existing disease classification systems.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Corporal diagnostic work and diagnostic spaces: clinicians’ use of space and bodies during diagnosis

Gardner

Williams

2015

Sociology Health & Illness

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An emerging body of literature in sociology has demonstrated that diagnosis is a useful focal point for understanding the social dimensions of health and illness. This article contributes to this work by drawing attention to the relationship between diagnostic spaces and the way in which clinicians use their own bodies during the diagnostic process. As a case study, we draw upon fieldwork conducted with a multidisciplinary clinical team providing deep brain stimulation (DBS) to treat children with a movement disorder called dystonia. Interviews were conducted with team members and diagnostic examinations were observed. We illustrate that clinicians use communicative body work and verbal communication to transform a material terrain into diagnostic space, and we illustrate how this diagnostic space configures forms of embodied ‘sensing‐and‐acting’ within. We argue that a ‘diagnosis’ can be conceptualised as emerging from an interaction in which space, the clinician‐body, and the patient‐body (or body‐part) mutually configure one another. By conceptualising diagnosis in this way, this article draws attention to the corporal bases of diagnostic power and counters Cartesian‐like accounts of clinical work in which the patient‐body is objectified by a disembodied medical discourse.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Corporal diagnostic work and diagnostic spaces: clinicians’ use of space and bodies during diagnosis

Gardner

Williams

2015

Sociology Health & Illness

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Devices are highly important in personnel's health and to improve patient's treatment [1,2]. In addition to physical examinations or patients' descriptions of their symptoms, physicians rely on diagnostic instruments to check for signs of diseases.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Equipment failures occur due to various causes which include the following [3]; Improper storage and transportation, Initial failure, Inappropriate handling, Inadequate maintenance, Environmental stress, Random failure, Inappropriate repair technique and Wear-out failure [10]. The World Health Organisation (WHO) estimates that 50% to 80% of such equipment remains non-functional and the most commonly cited reasons are, poor maintenance culture and lack of highly trained technicians [11,12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Maintenance Practice, Causes of Failure and Risk Assessment of Diagnostic Medical Equipment

Kutor¹,

Agede²,

Ali³

2017

J Biomed Eng Med Devic

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Diagnostic medical equipment are medical equipment that aid in the observation of various aspects of a patient's health condition. These devices help to form the basis for diagnosis and is therefore critical for this equipment to be efficiently maintained to ensure accurate and reliable output. In this study, we investigated the maintenance culture of diagnostic medical equipment and relate the findings to indices to find the exact causes of equipment failures. In the case study the sphygmomanometer was used. Our results have shown the following: (i) that most failures are due to preventable causes (ii) inadequate medical equipment technicians and engineers, (iii) Data deficiencies and (iv) lack of predictive maintenance.

show abstract

Expertise

Eyal¹

2015

Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The main claim of the essay is that expertise is better understood neither as a set of skills that experts possess nor as a social attribution, but as a historically specific way in which we currently talk about the intersection, articulation, and friction between professions, science and technology on the one hand, and law and democratic politics on the other. It is shown that talk in terms of expertise is a fairly recent phenomenon, and it is claimed that it reflects not the rise of the “expert society,” but its crisis, namely, as long as it was fairly clear who the experts were, and how to recognize them there was little discussion of expertise, but once the number of contenders for expert status has increased and the bases for their claims have become more heterogeneous; once the struggles between these would‐be experts intensified; expertise became problematized because the question was how to determine whose claim is legitimate. After surveying some of the current debates about the nature and character of expertise, the essay concludes by suggesting that the more fruitful approach is to treat expertise in an open‐ended nominalist manner as everything that is necessary to take into account when one seeks to give a description of the capacity to accomplish a relevant task, that is, of everything that is necessary in order for a particular expert statement or performance to be produced, repeated, and disseminated.

show abstract

Making sure. A comparative micro-analysis of diagnostic instruments in medical practice

Cited by 47 publications

References 25 publications

Corporal diagnostic work and diagnostic spaces: clinicians’ use of space and bodies during diagnosis

Corporal diagnostic work and diagnostic spaces: clinicians’ use of space and bodies during diagnosis

Maintenance Practice, Causes of Failure and Risk Assessment of Diagnostic Medical Equipment

Expertise

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About