WilliamsMemo10

Draft #2 of Memo 10 - not done yet (still missing 2/3 descriptions) I will post the final version above this one.

Williams Memo 10 Three Literatures, Thirty Citations

Scholar Categories //Description// xxxx //My Contribution// I would like to make explicit the connections between sustainable development and medical technology transfer in international regulation for public health. These would be cultural, social, monetary, localized, regional, etc Subthemes . Scholar Categories //Description// The “appropriate technology” movement arose in the early 1960’s, starting with a critical epistemic community composed of E. F. Schumacher and his colleagues who created the Intermediate Technology Development Group Limited. It was considered dead by Willoughby in his 1990 critique. However, a quick search of Google Scholar will find ~12000 hits on the phrase “‘appropriate technology’ AND medical.” It appears that the term, at least in medical technology discourse, is understood easily and used frequently by a very broad spectrum of professionals. Willoughby defines appropriate technology as "[a] mode of technology-practice aimed at ensuring that technology is compatible with its psychosocial and biophysical context (44)." The process of transferring appropriate medical technology may involve a tension between the desire to provide a community with prestige by demonstrating mastery of the latest medical technologies (De Castro 194) (Kressley 308), and the desire to better serve the interests of the community through the cheapest and best suited technologies. However, appropriate technology does not necessarily mean 'simple' technology, and depending on local circumstances, its selection may in fact involve privileging the employment of plentiful human capital over the use of more cost efficient mainstream 'Western' technologies (Malkin 581). For medical education and training, it may be more appropriate to adapt (NOT adopt/duplicate) medical curricula and technology-practice from industrialized nations; for example, China has seen success in improving rural health outcomes by training more nurses and auxiliaries (where typical convention of industrialized nations would suggest more doctors because they are better at diagnosing a broad spectrum of diseases) (Bader 444). Industrialized nations train medical personnel in research-focused teaching universities, which is typically where the latest and most advanced medical technologies are found. This type of training for a doctor whose end goal is to be a rural medical practitioner may be (1)impractical and (2)detrimentally indoctrinating them in the normative discourse that “the best available medical intervention…typically involves the latest technological advances (Kressley 307).” LDCs typically do not have the infrastructure to perform cutting-edge 'basic' research and biomedical product development. Developing countries do not necessarily want to spend money on expensive research equipment to investigate cures for a single disease when they might instead focus on the epidemiology of endemic, parasitic and communicable diseases and local interventions (Bader 444-5; Turnbull). This is especially true when one considers that the cost of new equipment is exceeded by ancillary costs for energy, personnel, and maintenance for the piece of equipment (Kressley 312-313) and that ninety-five percent of medical equipment found in hospitals in LDCs are imported (Malkin 571). Biomedical engineers and scientists are well-intentioned and enthusiastic about creating tools and products for global health (Turnbull; Yager et. al.) but I believe that many are still unaware of these complexities, and, instead believe that success involves mainly simplifying products and reducing their capital costs (Yager et. al.). In medical and public health literature, the words "dissemination", "implementation" and "translation" have specific meanings (Green et. al.). Practitioners might say dissemination (or guided diffusion), whereas engineers and entrepreneurs use the word transfer. They might discuss translation of a medication or technique, where engineers would describe product development and testing. Engineers might find the technology they design and test to be value-neutral; health practitioners, especially those involved with the development of pharmaceuticals, may be more aware of the politics involved. However, STS scholars have been trained to look at knowledge translation (at term that encompasses health practitioners' definitions of dissemination, implementation and translation) and other concepts with skepticism in order to tease out the aspects of culture, society and politics in their various instantiations. //My Contribution// I am interested in creating a more general theoretical framework for international medical technology transfer that recognizes that it is not just transferring medical artifacts and techniques, but also involves the translation of culture and values between industrialized and developing societies. This framework would not just describe the technological content of transfer, but would also articulate the decision-making process at multiple levels of participation by multiple actors. It will be designed around multi-sited qualitative field observations of exemplar cases of medical technology transfer. If possible I would like to validate this framework (or some small aspect of it) quantitatively. Subthemes Scholar Categories //Description// xxxx //My Contribution// I would like to contribute to medical anthropology scholarship with a description of small incision cataract surgery technology-practice (Willoughby) where this idea of technology-practice shows the holistic nature of what Ruit, et al are doing in Nepal. I would like to contribute to SCOT literature with an analysis of the intraocular lens as a boundary object and, or, political artifact. Specifically, I am interested in how the definition of the intraocular lens changes subtly with respect to its place (e.g. manufacturing laboratory, shipping box, operating room, operating tent, human eye) and how because each place is socially constructed depending upon political and cultural factors, some with a more static frame of reference than others, the definition of IOL navigates space and time in a very particular way. I am not sure how this contributes to SCOT literature (i.e. if there will be anything 'new' as far as theory), but it will be fun to write, and hopefully interesting to read. Subthemes
 * Literature 1 - Transnationalism & NGOs**
 * 1) Sociologists
 * 2) Public Health Practitioners
 * 3) Economists
 * 4) Political Scientists
 * 5) Science and Technology Studies Scholars
 * 1) // //Sustainability and international NGOs// //
 * 2) // van Kerkhoff, Lorrae, and Louis Lebel. 2006. Linking Knowledge and Action for Sustainable Development. //Annual Review of Environment and Resources// 31, no. 1: 445. doi:doi:10.1146/annurev.energy.31.102405.170850. //
 * 3) //????? //
 * 4) // //International public health regulation// //
 * 5) // Billups, J. O., and M. Julia. 1996. Technology Transfer and Integrated Social Development: International Issues and Possibilities for Social Work. //JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY AND SOCIAL WELFARE// 23: 175-188. //
 * 6) // Brown, Tim, and Morag Bell. 2008. Imperial or postcolonial governance? Dissecting the genealogy of a global public health strategy. //Social Science & Medicine// 67, no. 10 (November): 1571-1579. doi:doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.07.027. //
 * 7) // Harris, E., A. Belli, and N. Agabian. 1996. Appropriate Transfer of Molecular Technology to Latin America for Public Health and Biomedical Sciences. //BIOCHEMICAL EDUCATION// 24: 3-12. //
 * 8) // Holmberg, Sören, Bo Rothstein, and Naghmeh Nasiritousi. 2009. Quality of Government: What You Get. //Annual Review of Political Science// 12, no. 1. doi:doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-100608-104510. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-100608-104510 . //
 * 9) // Julia, M., and M. E. Kondrat. 2005. Health care in the social development context: Indigenous, participatory and empowering approaches. //International Social Work// 48, no. 5: 537. //
 * 10) // Lowy, Ilana, and Jean Paul Gaudilliere. 2008. Localizing the Global: Testing for Hereditary Risks of Breast Cancer. //Science Technology Human Values// 33, no. 3: 299-325. //
 * 11) // Munira, Syarifah Liza, and Scott A. Fritzen. 2007. What influences government adoption of vaccines in developing countries? A policy process analysis. //Social Science & Medicine// 65, no. 8 (October): 1751-1764. doi:doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.05.054. //
 * 12) // Waitzkin, Howard, Rebeca Jasso-Aguilar, Angela Landwehr, and Carolyn Mountain. 2005. Global trade, public health, and health services: Stakeholders' constructions of the key issues. //Social Science & Medicine// 61, no. 5 (September): 893-906. doi:doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.01.010. //
 * 13) // //Medical technology intellectual property// //
 * 14) // Merry, S E. 1992. Anthropology, Law, and Transnational Processes. //Annual Review of Anthropology// 21, no. 1: 357. doi:doi:10.1146/annurev.an.21.100192.002041. //
 * 15) // Faulkner, Alex, and Julie Kent. 2001. Innovation and regulation in human implant technologies: developing comparative approaches. //Social Science & Medicine// 53, no. 7 (October): 895-913. doi:doi: DOI: 10.1016/S0277-9536(00)00389-0. //
 * 16) // //Transnational collectives and networks// //
 * 17) // Edelman, Marc. 2001. SOCIAL MOVEMENTS: Changing Paradigms and Forms of Politics. //Annual Review of Anthropology// 30, no. 1: 285. doi:doi:10.1146/annurev.anthro.30.1.285. //
 * 18) // Fisher, William F. 1997. DOING GOOD? The Politics and Antipolitics of NGO Practices. //Annual Review of Anthropology// 26, no. 1: 439. doi:doi:10.1146/annurev.anthro.26.1.439. //
 * 19) // Gatrell, Anthony C. 2005. Complexity theory and geographies of health: a critical assessment. //Social Science & Medicine// 60, no. 12 (June): 2661-2671. doi:doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.11.002. //
 * 20) // Gayen, Kaberi, and Robert Raeside. 2007. Social networks, normative influence and health delivery in rural Bangladesh. //Social Science & Medicine// 65, no. 5 (September): 900-914. doi:doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.03.037. //
 * 21) // Kearney, M. 1995. The Local and the Global: The Anthropology of Globalization and Transnationalism. //Annual Review of Anthropology// 24, no. 1: 547. doi:doi:10.1146/annurev.an.24.100195.002555. //
 * 22) // Kelly, Susan E. 2003. Public Bioethics and Publics: Consensus, Boundaries, and Participation in Biomedical Science Policy. //Science Technology Human Values// 28, no. 3: 339-364. //
 * Literature 2 - Medical technology diffusion & public health**
 * 1) Sociologists
 * 2) Anthropologists
 * 3) Public Health Practitioners
 * 4) Medical Doctors
 * 5) Economists
 * 6) Engineers
 * 7) Science and Technology Studies Scholars
 * 1) // //Appropriate medical technology// //
 * 2) // Bader, M B. 1977. The international transfer of medical technology--an analysis and a proposal for effective monitoring. //Int J Health Serv.// 7, no. 3: 443-458. //
 * 3) // De Castro, Leonardo D. Transporting values by technology transfer. //Bioethics// 11, no. 3-4: 193-205. //
 * 4) // Malkin, Robert A. 2007. Design of Health Care Technologies for the Developing World. //Annual Review of Biomedical Engineering// 9, no. 1: 567. doi:doi:10.1146/annurev.bioeng.9.060906.151913. //
 * 5) // Turnbull, D. 1989. The Push for a Malaria Vaccine. //Social Studies of Science// 19, no. 2: 283. //
 * 6) // Yager, Paul, Gonzalo J. Domingo, and John Gerdes. 2008. Point-of-Care Diagnostics for Global Health. //Annual Review of Biomedical Engineering// 10, no. 1: 107. doi:doi:10.1146/annurev.bioeng.10.061807.160524. //
 * 7) // Willoughby, Kelvin W. __Technology Choice: A Critique of the Appropriate Technology Movement.__ Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1990 (appropriate technology) //
 * 8) // //Diffusion theories// //
 * 9) // Green, Lawrence W., Judith M. Ottoson, César Garcia, and Robert A. Hiatt. 2009. Diffusion Theory, and Knowledge Dissemination, Utilization, and Integration in Public Health. //Annual Review of Public Health// 30, no. 1. doi:doi:10.1146/annurev.publhealth.031308.100049. http://arjournals.annualreviews.org/doi/full/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.031308.100049 . //
 * 10) // //Measuring health technology diffusion// //
 * 11) // Kressley, K. M. 1981. Diffusion of high technology medical care and cost control--a public policy dilemma. //Technol Soc// 3, no. 3: 305-22. //
 * Literature 3 - Social construction of medical technology-practice**
 * 1) Anthropologists
 * 2) Sociologists
 * 3) Science and Technology Studies Scholars
 * 1) // //Medical technology artifacts// //
 * 2) // Blume, Stuart S. 1997. The Rhetoric and Counter-Rhetoric of a "Bionic" Technology. //Science Technology Human Values// 22, no. 1: 31-56. //
 * 3) // Clarke, Adele, and Theresa Montini. The Many Faces of RU486: Tales of Situated Knowledges and Technological Contest. //
 * 4) // Pfaffenberger, B. 1992. Social Anthropology of Technology. //Annual Review of Anthropology// 21, no. 1: 491. doi:doi:10.1146/annurev.an.21.100192.002423. //
 * 5) // Schumaker, Lynette Louise, and Virginia A. Bond. 2008. Antiretroviral therapy in Zambia: Colours, [`]spoiling', [`]talk' and the meaning of antiretrovirals. //Social Science & Medicine// 67, no. 12 (December): 2126-2134. doi:doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.09.006. //
 * 6) // Strathern, Marilyn. 2004. THE WHOLE PERSON AND ITS ARTIFACTS. //Annual Review of Anthropology// 33, no. 1: 1. doi:doi:10.1146/annurev.anthro.33.070203.143928. //
 * 7) // //Medical technology-practice// //
 * 8) // Bud, Robert. 1991. Biotechnology in the Twentieth Century (boundary objects //
 * 9) // Cummins, Steven, Sarah Curtis, Ana V. Diez-Roux, and Sally Macintyre. 2007. Understanding and representing [`]place' in health research: A relational approach. //Social Science & Medicine// 65, no. 9 (November): 1825-1838. doi:doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.05.036. //
 * 10) // Hahn, R A, and A Kleinman. 1983. Biomedical Practice and Anthropological Theory: Frameworks and Directions. //Annual Review of Anthropology// 12, no. 1: 305. doi:doi:10.1146/annurev.an.12.100183.001513. //
 * 11) // Harper, Ian. 2007. Translating ethics: Researching public health and medical practices in Nepal. //Social Science & Medicine// 65, no. 11 (December): 2235-2247. doi:doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.08.007. //
 * 12) // Lehoux, Pascale, Genevi�ve Daudelin, Blake Poland, Gavin J. Andrews, and Dave Holmes. 2007. Designing a better place for patients: Professional struggles surrounding satellite and mobile dialysis units. //Social Science & Medicine// 65, no. 7 (October): 1536-1548. doi:doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.05.029. //
 * 13) // Saetnan, Ann Rudinow. 1991. Rigid Politics and Technological Flexibility: The Anatomy of a Failed Hospital Innovation. //Science Technology Human Values// 16, no. 4: 419-447. //
 * 14) // Willoughby, Kelvin W. __Technology Choice: A Critique of the Appropriate Technology Movement.__ Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1990 (appropriate technology) //
 * 15) // //Knowledge translation/ Technology Transfer// //
 * 16) // Faulkner, Wendy. 1994. Conceptualizing Knowledge Used in Innovation: A Second Look at the Science-Technology Distinction and Industrial Innovation. //Science Technology Human Values// 19, no. 4: 425-458. //
 * 17) // Franklin, Sarah. 1995. Science as Culture, Cultures of Science. //Annual Review of Anthropology// 24, no. 1: 163. doi:doi:10.1146/annurev.an.24.100195.001115. //
 * 18) // Misa, Thomas J. 1992. Theories of Technological Change: Parameters and Purposes. //Science Technology Human Values// 17, no. 1: 3-12. //
 * 19) // Rogers, Juan D, and Barry Bozeman. 2001. "Knowledge Value Alliances": An Alternative to the R&D Project Focus in Evaluation. //Science Technology Human Values// 26, no. 1: 23-55. //
 * 20) // Smith, David A. 1993. Technology and the Modern World-System: Some Reflections. //Science Technology Human Values// 18, no. 2: 186-195. //

Sunday version/Draft of Memo 10 - not done yet (missing description). I will post the final version above this one.

Williams Memo 10 Three Literatures, Thirty Citations

Memo 10: Three Literatures, Thirty Citations Scholar Categories Subthemes //Description// xxx //My Contribution// I would like to make explicit the connections between sustainable development and medical technology transfer in international regulation for public health. These would be cultural, social, monetary, localized, regional, etc. Scholar Categories Subthemes //Description// xxx //My Contribution// I am interested in creating a more general theoretical framework for international medical technology transfer that recognizes that medical technology transfer is not just transferring medical artifacts and techniques, but also involves the translation of culture and values between industrialized and developing societies. This framework would not just describe the technological content of transfer, but would also articulate the decision-making process at multiple levels of participation by multiple actors. If possible I would like to validate this framework (or some small aspect of it) quantitatively. Scholar Categories Subthemes //Description// xxx //My Contribution// I would like to contribute to medical anthropology scholarship with a description of small incision cataract surgery technology-practice (Willoughby) where this idea of technology-practice shows the holistic nature of what Ruit, et al are doing in Nepal. I would like to contribute to SCOT literature with an analysis of the intraocular lens as a boundary object and, or, political artifact. Specifically, I am interested in how the definition of the intraocular lens changes subtly with respect to its place (e.g. manufacturing laboratory, shipping box, operating room, operating tent, human eye) and how because each place is socially constructed depending upon political and cultural factors, some with a more static frame of reference than others, the definition of IOL navigates space and time in a very particular way. I am not sure how this contributes to SCOT literature (i.e. if there will be anything 'new' as far as theory), but it will be fun to write, and hopefully interesting to read.
 * 1) descriptions of three literatures your research will **draw on and contribute to**
 * 2) Each description should be about **400 words and include 10 citations**, entered through some kind of bibliographic software package
 * 3) Each description should articulate the **focus of the literature**, relevant aspects of **its genealogy** , how it has **evolved in recent years** and **key sub-themes; Quotes and concrete examples** of what the literatures do will make these descriptions stronger
 * 4) Each should also include an **articulation** of how your research will draw on and contribute to the literature described.
 * Literature 1 - Transnationalism & NGOs**
 * 1) Sociologists
 * 2) Public Health Practitioners
 * 3) Economists
 * 4) Political Scientists
 * 5) Science and Technology Studies Scholars
 * 1) Sustainability and international NGOs
 * 2) //????? //
 * 3) International public health regulation
 * 4) // Brown, Tim, and Morag Bell. 2008. Imperial or postcolonial governance? Dissecting the genealogy of a global public health strategy.  //Social Science & Medicine// 67, no. 10 (November): 1571-1579. doi:doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.07.027. //
 * 5) // Holmberg, Sören, Bo Rothstein, and Naghmeh Nasiritousi. 2009. Quality of Government: What You Get.  //Annual Review of Political Science// 12, no. 1. doi:doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-100608-104510. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-100608-104510 . //
 * 6) // Lowy, Ilana, and Jean Paul Gaudilliere. 2008. Localizing the Global: Testing for Hereditary Risks of Breast Cancer.  //Science Technology Human Values// 33, no. 3: 299-325. //
 * 7) // Munira, Syarifah Liza, and Scott A. Fritzen. 2007. What influences government adoption of vaccines in developing countries? A policy process analysis.  //Social Science & Medicine// 65, no. 8 (October): 1751-1764. doi:doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.05.054. //
 * 8) // Waitzkin, Howard, Rebeca Jasso-Aguilar, Angela Landwehr, and Carolyn Mountain. 2005. Global trade, public health, and health services: Stakeholders' constructions of the key issues.  //Social Science & Medicine// 61, no. 5 (September): 893-906. doi:doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.01.010. //
 * 9) Medical technology intellectual property
 * 10) // Merry, S E. 1992. Anthropology, Law, and Transnational Processes.  //Annual Review of Anthropology// 21, no. 1: 357. doi:doi:10.1146/annurev.an.21.100192.002041. //
 * 11) // Faulkner, Alex, and Julie Kent. 2001. Innovation and regulation in human implant technologies: developing comparative approaches.  //Social Science & Medicine// 53, no. 7 (October): 895-913. doi:doi: DOI: 10.1016/S0277-9536(00)00389-0. //
 * 12) Transnational collectives and networks
 * 13) // Edelman, Marc. 2001. SOCIAL MOVEMENTS: Changing Paradigms and Forms of Politics.  //Annual Review of Anthropology// 30, no. 1: 285. doi:doi:10.1146/annurev.anthro.30.1.285. //
 * 14) // Fisher, William F. 1997. DOING GOOD? The Politics and Antipolitics of NGO Practices.  //Annual Review of Anthropology// 26, no. 1: 439. doi:doi:10.1146/annurev.anthro.26.1.439. //
 * 15) // Gatrell, Anthony C. 2005. Complexity theory and geographies of health: a critical assessment.  //Social Science & Medicine// 60, no. 12 (June): 2661-2671. doi:doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.11.002. //
 * 16) // Gayen, Kaberi, and Robert Raeside. 2007. Social networks, normative influence and health delivery in rural Bangladesh.  //Social Science & Medicine// 65, no. 5 (September): 900-914. doi:doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.03.037. //
 * 17) // Kearney, M. 1995. The Local and the Global: The Anthropology of Globalization and Transnationalism.  //Annual Review of Anthropology// 24, no. 1: 547. doi:doi:10.1146/annurev.an.24.100195.002555. //
 * 18) // van Kerkhoff, Lorrae, and Louis Lebel. 2006. Linking Knowledge and Action for Sustainable Development.  //Annual Review of Environment and Resources// 31, no. 1: 445. doi:doi:10.1146/annurev.energy.31.102405.170850. //
 * Literature 2 - Medical technology diffusion & public health**
 * 1) Sociologists
 * 2) Anthropologists
 * 3) Public Health Practitioners
 * 4) Medical Doctors
 * 5) Economists
 * 6) Engineers
 * 7) Science and Technology Studies Scholars
 * 1) Appropriate medical technology design
 * 2) // Malkin, Robert A. 2007. Design of Health Care Technologies for the Developing World.  //Annual Review of Biomedical Engineering// 9, no. 1: 567. doi:doi:10.1146/annurev.bioeng.9.060906.151913. //
 * 3) // Yager, Paul, Gonzalo J. Domingo, and John Gerdes. 2008. Point-of-Care Diagnostics for Global Health.  //Annual Review of Biomedical Engineering// 10, no. 1: 107. doi:doi:10.1146/annurev.bioeng.10.061807.160524. //
 * 4) Diffusion theories
 * 5) // Green, Lawrence W., Judith M. Ottoson, César Garcia, and Robert A. Hiatt. 2009. Diffusion Theory, and Knowledge Dissemination, Utilization, and Integration in Public Health.  //Annual Review of Public Health// 30, no. 1. doi:doi:10.1146/annurev.publhealth.031308.100049. http://arjournals.annualreviews.org/doi/full/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.031308.100049 . //
 * 6) Measuring health technology diffusion
 * 7) // Kotwal, Atul. 2005. Innovation, diffusion and safety of a medical technology: a review of the literature on injection practices.  //Social Science & Medicine// 60, no. 5 (March): 1133-1147. doi:doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.06.044. //
 * Literature 3 - Social construction of medical technology-practice**
 * 1) Anthropologists
 * 2) Sociologists
 * 3) Science and Technology Studies Scholars
 * 1) Medical technology artifacts
 * 2) // Blume, Stuart S. 1997. The Rhetoric and Counter-Rhetoric of a "Bionic" Technology.  //Science Technology Human Values// 22, no. 1: 31-56. //
 * 3) // Clarke, Adele, and Theresa Montini. The Many Faces of RU486: Tales of Situated Knowledges and Technological Contest. //
 * 4) // Pfaffenberger, B. 1992. Social Anthropology of Technology.  //Annual Review of Anthropology// 21, no. 1: 491. doi:doi:10.1146/annurev.an.21.100192.002423. //
 * 5) // Schumaker, Lynette Louise, and Virginia A. Bond. 2008. Antiretroviral therapy in Zambia: Colours, [`]spoiling', [`]talk' and the meaning of antiretrovirals.  //Social Science & Medicine// 67, no. 12 (December): 2126-2134. doi:doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.09.006. //
 * 6) // Strathern, Marilyn. 2004. THE WHOLE PERSON AND ITS ARTIFACTS.  //Annual Review of Anthropology// 33, no. 1: 1. doi:doi:10.1146/annurev.anthro.33.070203.143928. //
 * 7) Medical technology-practice
 * 8) // Bud, Robert. 1991. Biotechnology in the Twentieth Century (boundary objects //
 * 9) // Cummins, Steven, Sarah Curtis, Ana V. Diez-Roux, and Sally Macintyre. 2007. Understanding and representing [`]place' in health research: A relational approach.  //Social Science & Medicine// 65, no. 9 (November): 1825-1838. doi:doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.05.036. //
 * 10) // Hahn, R A, and A Kleinman. 1983. Biomedical Practice and Anthropological Theory: Frameworks and Directions.  //Annual Review of Anthropology// 12, no. 1: 305. doi:doi:10.1146/annurev.an.12.100183.001513. //
 * 11) // Harper, Ian. 2007. Translating ethics: Researching public health and medical practices in Nepal.  //Social Science & Medicine// 65, no. 11 (December): 2235-2247. doi:doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.08.007. //
 * 12) // Lehoux, Pascale, Genevi�ve Daudelin, Blake Poland, Gavin J. Andrews, and Dave Holmes. 2007. Designing a better place for patients: Professional struggles surrounding satellite and mobile dialysis units.  //Social Science & Medicine// 65, no. 7 (October): 1536-1548. doi:doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.05.029. //
 * 13) // Saetnan, Ann Rudinow. 1991. Rigid Politics and Technological Flexibility: The Anatomy of a Failed Hospital Innovation.  //Science Technology Human Values// 16, no. 4: 419-447. //
 * 14) // Willoughby, Kelvin W. __Technology Choice: A Critique of the Appropriate Technology Movement.__ Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1990 (appropriate technology) //
 * 15) Knowledge translation
 * 16) // Faulkner, Wendy. 1994. Conceptualizing Knowledge Used in Innovation: A Second Look at the Science-Technology Distinction and Industrial Innovation.  //Science Technology Human Values// 19, no. 4: 425-458. //
 * 17) // Franklin, Sarah. 1995. Science as Culture, Cultures of Science.  //Annual Review of Anthropology// 24, no. 1: 163. doi:doi:10.1146/annurev.an.24.100195.001115. //
 * 18) // Kelly, Susan E. 2003. Public Bioethics and Publics: Consensus, Boundaries, and Participation in Biomedical Science Policy.  //Science Technology Human Values// 28, no. 3: 339-364. //
 * 19) // Misa, Thomas J. 1992. Theories of Technological Change: Parameters and Purposes.  //Science Technology Human Values// 17, no. 1: 3-12. //
 * 20) // Rogers, Juan D, and Barry Bozeman. 2001. "Knowledge Value Alliances": An Alternative to the R&D Project Focus in Evaluation.  //Science Technology Human Values// 26, no. 1: 23-55. //