Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T17:26:44.899Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Imaging Technologies

Iconoclasts Among the Images

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 March 2009

W. Peter Cockshott  and
P. E. S. Palmer
W. Peter Cockshott
Affiliation:
McMaster University Medical Centre
P. E. S. Palmer
Affiliation:
University of California, Davis
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

High technology developments in diagnostic imaging raise a number of issues that are disturbing. New developments do not always favor greater diagnostic efficacy since fads, marketing promotion, and entrepreneurs can distort medical goals. New advances disseminate rapidly in affluent societies before formal benefit evaluations are completed. We suggest that digitization of radiography must be critically assessed, and simplicity of equipment design should be promoted. Though medical and economic factors can provide guidelines for policy making, the ultimate priority decisions are political in nature.

Type
Special Section: The Organization and Use of Technology in the Hospital Part II: Case Studies
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 3 , Issue 3 , July 1987 , pp. 355 - 361
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1987

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

1.Amiel, M.Comment developper l'evaluation des procedures diagnostiques en imagerie medicale. Journal de Radiologie, 1986, 67, 265–268.Google Scholar
2.Borden, W. C.The use of the Roentgen ray by the medical department of the United States Army in the war with Spain, 1898. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1900.Google Scholar
3.Cockshott, W. P.Rolls Royces or compacts? Selection of radiological instrumentation. Radiology, 1983, 148, 862.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Cockshott, W. P., Palmer, P. E. S.High frequency x-ray generators: Calls for rejoicing or concern. American Journal of Roentgenology, 1983, 140, 626–627.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Grainger, R. G.Editorial. Radiological contrast media. Clinical Radiology, 1987, 38, 3–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Gray, J. E., Karsell, P. R., Becker, G. P., et al. A skeptical look at a (digital) sacred cow. Proceedings of SPIE Medical Imaging, and Instrumentation, 1984, 486, 160–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Holm, T.New developments in basic radiographie systems. European Journal of Radiology, 1983, 3, 291–293.Google Scholar
8.James, E. A., Carroll, F., Pickens, D., et al. Medical image management. Radiology, 1986, 160, 847–851.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9. Voltaire. Dictionnaire Philosophique. Paris, 1764.Google Scholar