IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Innovation in high risk drug therapy

Listed author(s):
  • Peay, Marilyn Y.
  • Peay, Edmund R.
Registered author(s):

    The aim of this study was to identify predictors of the early adoption of high risk drugs by specialists with the expectation that the processes of innovation in this domain differ from those identified for general medical practice. One hundred and fifty-six specialists provided information regarding their awareness and use of each of eight target drugs, selected for their riskiness, and discussed in detail their adoption of one of them. General innovative behaviour, as assessed by awareness and use of the target drugs, as well as early first news of the particular drug discussed, were predictable from formal and informal contact with colleagues. However, the results indicate that two types of contact with colleagues are clearly distinguishable, as an information source and as an information seeker, which are independent and which show different patterns of prediction. Early use of the drug discussed was largely independent of the potential predictors. It is argued that first use of high risk drugs is determined by two factors, preparedness to prescribe the new drug and the presentation of particular circumstances which are appropriate for its use, only the first of which is predictable from the variables ordinarily thought to be involved in innovation. Therefore, if innovation is to be identified with stable characteristics of the practitioner, then this concept must be redefined in terms of knowledge and judgement rather than in terms of a particular behavioural event.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Social Science & Medicine.

    Volume (Year): 39 (1994)
    Issue (Month): 1 (July)
    Pages: 39-52

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:39:y:1994:i:1:p:39-52
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    Order Information: Postal:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:39:y:1994:i:1:p:39-52. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.