FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1993630278> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1993630278 endingPage "92" @default.
• W1993630278 startingPage "76" @default.
• W1993630278 abstract "MEDICINE AND TECHNOLOGY JONATHAN M. UEBENAU* Debates over the role of medical technology have been raging in public and professional circles for the past 20 years. The history of medicine and technology, however, has not reflected the depth of contemporary interest in the subject. And where historians have looked at medicine and technology, they have often taken a rather limited approach. Historians of many descriptions have studied medicine, and currently there is a boom in the social history of medicine, especially of the nineteenthcentury English-speaking world. Although they have used techniques from other areas of history, medical historians have generally not borrowed from the history of technology. However, now that historians are studying technology from a perspective broader than merely considering the form and development ofmechanisms, we could apply these new modes of analysis to the history of medicine and go beyond the limited issue of the use of instruments and tools. Despite the potential of these approaches, however, only a few writers have begun to take up this work. Stanley Reiser, whose Medicine and the Reign ofTechnology provides a review of diagnostic technology and a critique of its overuse, is now perhaps the best known of such historians [I]. Audrey Davis covers a wider range of topics in her book on the history of medical technology [2]: she has defined medical activity broadly as technique and technology , viewing modern medicine as a set of skills often based on or reliant on instruments. There are a number of ways in which we can speak of medicine and technology, ranging from the effects of modern life on epidemiology to the conception ofparticular organs and bodily functions in technological terms. For the sake of simplicity, I shall separate them into four general classes. The first consists of the health consequences of the fundamental technological changes which we associate with urbanisation and industrialisation . The second includes the way in which medical practice has * Business History Unit, London School of Economics, 10 Portugal Street, London WC2A 2HD, England.© 1983 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved. 0031-5982/84/2701-0369$01.00 76 I Jonathan M. Liebenau ¦ Mediane and Technology been adapted to technological society, and, in particular, how new tools and techniques have been developed and used. In the third, I will look at medicine itself as a technological system, influenced both by the new technological styles of management of the last century and by the imperatives of the efficient use of hardware. Finally, there are a number ofconceptual alterations which can be associated with technological ways of thinking. These include models of structure and function that were either derived from an engineering image of the body or were used as explanations for systems oftreatment and practice. These categories are not exclusive, and the examples I present are intended simply to illustrate how we may view particular issues from this perspective. I The most profound effects of technology on medicine are not, surely, the availability of heart transplants or radiographs or even entire hospital complexes, but the epidemiological changes brought about by industrialisation . Disease patterns have been radically altered by modern city living and by factory work. While the urban plagues of cholera, tuberculosis , and diphtheria are numerically the most significant, the clearest examples are from industrial accidents. This can be seen in the case of railway injuries. It took generations to adjust to inexorably moving machinery , and with the widespread use of heavy equipment, in particular on the railways, the incidence of compound fractures rose significantly. This problem encouragedJoseph Lister to concentrate on the difficulties of wound healing, resulting in his work on antisepsis [3]. Railway accidents were classed separately in many hospital patient lists, and the London Times kept an almost daily column for such reports. In the mid 1860s a debate was raging about the medical character of railway accidents , fuelled in part by resultant lawsuits.1 Such cases were among the first in which expert testimony was presented in British courts. In one celebrated instance in 1867, a half-dozen prominent London physicians and surgeons were matched againstone another to debate the legitimacy of a £12,000 claim after spinal injury. Juries usually did award compensation..." @default.
• W1993630278 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1993630278 creator A5077527477 @default.
• W1993630278 date "1983-01-01" @default.
• W1993630278 modified "2023-10-13" @default.
• W1993630278 title "Medicine and Technology" @default.
• W1993630278 cites W1574664604 @default.
• W1993630278 cites W1587076374 @default.
• W1993630278 cites W1972154093 @default.
• W1993630278 cites W1986994301 @default.
• W1993630278 cites W1988390005 @default.
• W1993630278 cites W2038975246 @default.
• W1993630278 cites W2070068687 @default.
• W1993630278 cites W2086702565 @default.
• W1993630278 cites W2092137851 @default.
• W1993630278 cites W2122078128 @default.
• W1993630278 cites W2139973544 @default.
• W1993630278 cites W2315359951 @default.
• W1993630278 cites W2333222776 @default.
• W1993630278 cites W2395491567 @default.
• W1993630278 cites W2401523800 @default.
• W1993630278 cites W2409901033 @default.
• W1993630278 cites W2410863581 @default.
• W1993630278 cites W2417774714 @default.
• W1993630278 cites W2418693814 @default.
• W1993630278 cites W279534164 @default.
• W1993630278 cites W3138465534 @default.
• W1993630278 cites W572532941 @default.
• W1993630278 cites W598182696 @default.
• W1993630278 cites W609697454 @default.
• W1993630278 cites W2401969733 @default.
• W1993630278 doi "https://doi.org/10.1353/pbm.1983.0014" @default.
• W1993630278 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6646983" @default.
• W1993630278 hasPublicationYear "1983" @default.
• W1993630278 type Work @default.
• W1993630278 sameAs 1993630278 @default.
• W1993630278 citedByCount "8" @default.
• W1993630278 countsByYear W19936302782013 @default.
• W1993630278 countsByYear W19936302782014 @default.
• W1993630278 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W1993630278 hasAuthorship W1993630278A5077527477 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConcept C12713177 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConcept C127413603 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConcept C141441539 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConcept C154945302 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConcept C160735492 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConcept C161191863 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConcept C177264268 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConcept C199360897 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConcept C206179267 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConcept C21333345 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConcept C2777228553 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConcept C2777855551 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConcept C2992737218 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConcept C512399662 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConcept C55587333 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConcept C72636640 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConcept C74916050 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConcept C87717796 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConcept C95457728 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConceptScore W1993630278C126322002 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConceptScore W1993630278C12713177 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConceptScore W1993630278C127413603 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConceptScore W1993630278C141441539 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConceptScore W1993630278C144024400 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConceptScore W1993630278C154945302 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConceptScore W1993630278C160735492 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConceptScore W1993630278C161191863 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConceptScore W1993630278C177264268 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConceptScore W1993630278C17744445 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConceptScore W1993630278C199360897 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConceptScore W1993630278C199539241 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConceptScore W1993630278C206179267 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConceptScore W1993630278C21333345 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConceptScore W1993630278C2777228553 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConceptScore W1993630278C2777855551 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConceptScore W1993630278C2992737218 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConceptScore W1993630278C41008148 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConceptScore W1993630278C512399662 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConceptScore W1993630278C55587333 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConceptScore W1993630278C71924100 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConceptScore W1993630278C72636640 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConceptScore W1993630278C74916050 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConceptScore W1993630278C87717796 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConceptScore W1993630278C94625758 @default.
• W1993630278 hasConceptScore W1993630278C95457728 @default.
• W1993630278 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W1993630278 hasLocation W19936302781 @default.
• W1993630278 hasLocation W19936302782 @default.
• W1993630278 hasOpenAccess W1993630278 @default.
• W1993630278 hasPrimaryLocation W19936302781 @default.

• next