Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Evaluation & the Health Professions
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mike, V.
Right arrow Articles by Ross, G. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Mike, V.
Right arrow Articles by Ross, G. S.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Responsibility for Clinical Innovation

A Case Study in Neonatal Medicine

Valerie Mike

Alfred N. Krauss

Gail S. Ross

Cornell University Medical College

Proper evaluation of clinical innovations and of the process of their diffusion is essentialfor the development of sound health care policy. This case study examines transcutaneous oxygen monitoring in neonatal intensive care, a procedure that was rapidly adopted in the late 1970s as a scientific breakthrough of great promise, then all but abandoned within a decade in favor of pulse oximetry, a still more recent technology. The study incorporates the results of interviews with representatives of industry as well as biomedical researchers and clinicians involved with these devices. Factors in technology diffusion are analyzed, with special attention to those susceptible to change by policy makers. Participants in the diffusion process also include nurses, hospital administrators, the legal profession, the news media, and the public, but the pivotal roleand hence ultimate responsibility-is seen to be that of the physician. The discussion is presented in the context of a proposed "ethics of evidence " pertinent to medical decision making.

Evaluation & the Health Professions, Vol. 21, No. 1, 3-26 (1998)
DOI: 10.1177/016327879802100101
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?