Trine Schifter Larsen, Jesper Eugen-Olsen, Ove Andersen, Jeanette Wassar Kirk
{"title":"Challenges facing the clinical adoption of a new prognostic biomarker: a case study.","authors":"Trine Schifter Larsen, Jesper Eugen-Olsen, Ove Andersen, Jeanette Wassar Kirk","doi":"10.1057/s41292-022-00296-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In this article, we show how a particular biomarker comes into being in an emergency department in a hospital in Copenhagen, Denmark. We explore the contextual becoming of this biomarker, suPAR, through interviews with nurses and physicians and through relational ontology. We find that as a prognostic biomarker suPAR is challenged in it becoming as an object for clinical practice in the emergency department by the power of diagnostic practices and the desire for experience-based scripts that quickly enable the clinician to reach the right diagnosis. Although suPAR is enacted as a promising triage strategy suggesting a low or high risk of disease, the inability to rule out specific diagnoses and producing the notion of secure clinical actions make its non-specificity and prognostic character problematic in clinical practices. Specific diagnostic criteria versus prognostic interpretation and non-specificity risk profiling challenges the way healthcare workers in an emergency department understand the tasks they are set to solve and how to solve them. We discuss how the becoming of suPAR is strengthened through enactments of specificity and engagement in triage strategies and we reflect on it's becoming through new diagnostic practices with the need to accommodate diagnostic ambiguity.</p>","PeriodicalId":46976,"journal":{"name":"Biosocieties","volume":" ","pages":"1-23"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9860228/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biosocieties","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41292-022-00296-2","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In this article, we show how a particular biomarker comes into being in an emergency department in a hospital in Copenhagen, Denmark. We explore the contextual becoming of this biomarker, suPAR, through interviews with nurses and physicians and through relational ontology. We find that as a prognostic biomarker suPAR is challenged in it becoming as an object for clinical practice in the emergency department by the power of diagnostic practices and the desire for experience-based scripts that quickly enable the clinician to reach the right diagnosis. Although suPAR is enacted as a promising triage strategy suggesting a low or high risk of disease, the inability to rule out specific diagnoses and producing the notion of secure clinical actions make its non-specificity and prognostic character problematic in clinical practices. Specific diagnostic criteria versus prognostic interpretation and non-specificity risk profiling challenges the way healthcare workers in an emergency department understand the tasks they are set to solve and how to solve them. We discuss how the becoming of suPAR is strengthened through enactments of specificity and engagement in triage strategies and we reflect on it's becoming through new diagnostic practices with the need to accommodate diagnostic ambiguity.
期刊介绍:
BioSocieties is committed to the scholarly exploration of the crucial social, ethical and policy implications of developments in the life sciences and biomedicine. These developments are increasing our ability to control our own biology; enabling us to create novel life forms; changing our ideas of ‘normality’ and ‘abnormality’; transforming our understanding of personal identity, family relations, ancestry and ‘race’; altering our social and personal expectations and responsibilities; reshaping global economic opportunities and inequalities; creating new global security challenges; and generating new social, ethical, legal and regulatory dilemmas. To address these dilemmas requires us to break out from narrow disciplinary boundaries within the social sciences and humanities, and between these disciplines and the natural sciences, and to develop new ways of thinking about the relations between biology and sociality and between the life sciences and society.
BioSocieties provides a crucial forum where the most rigorous social research and critical analysis of these issues can intersect with the work of leading scientists, social researchers, clinicians, regulators and other stakeholders. BioSocieties defines the key intellectual issues at the science-society interface, and offers pathways to the resolution of the critical local, national and global socio-political challenges that arise from scientific and biomedical advances.
As the first journal of its kind, BioSocieties publishes scholarship across the social science disciplines, and represents a lively and balanced array of perspectives on controversial issues. In its inaugural year BioSocieties demonstrated the constructive potential of interdisciplinary dialogue and debate across the social and natural sciences. We are becoming the journal of choice not only for social scientists, but also for life scientists interested in the larger social, ethical and policy implications of their work. The journal is international in scope, spanning research and developments in all corners of the globe.
BioSocieties is published quarterly, with occasional themed issues that highlight some of the critical questions and problematics of modern biotechnologies. Articles, response pieces, review essays, and self-standing editorial pieces by social and life scientists form a regular part of the journal.