IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v69y2009i1p21-27.html

Objectification, standardization, and commodification in health care: A conceptual readjustment

Author

Listed:
  • Timmermans, Stefan
  • Almeling, Rene

Abstract

Historically, medical sociologists have used the interrelated concepts of objectification, commodification, and standardization to point to the pathologies of modern medicine, such as the depersonalization of care and the effects of bureaucratic control. More recent work in science studies, economic sociology, and sociology of health and illness, however, has begun to explore how the social processes of objectification, commodification, and standardization produce a wide variety of biomedical achievements. We provide a theoretical synthesis of this emerging body of scholarship centered upon the intended and unintended consequences of objectification, commodification, and standardization to improve health. We then outline a research agenda that would result from a more comprehensive assessment of how these processes manifest themselves in clinical care.

Suggested Citation

  • Timmermans, Stefan & Almeling, Rene, 2009. "Objectification, standardization, and commodification in health care: A conceptual readjustment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 21-27, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:69:y:2009:i:1:p:21-27
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(09)00248-2
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stephen Benard & Shelley Correll & In Paik, 2007. "Getting a job: Is there a motherhood penalty?," Natural Field Experiments 00227, The Field Experiments Website.
    2. Mykhalovskiy, Eric & Weir, Lorna, 2004. "The problem of evidence-based medicine: directions for social science," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 59(5), pages 1059-1069, September.
    3. May, Carl & Rapley, Tim & Moreira, Tiago & Finch, Tracy & Heaven, Ben, 2006. "Technogovernance: Evidence, subjectivity, and the clinical encounter in primary care medicine," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(4), pages 1022-1030, February.
    4. Waitzkin, H., 1979. "A Marxian interpretation of the growth and development of coronary care technology," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 69(12), pages 1260-1268.
    5. Joffe, Carole & Weitz, Tracy A., 2003. "Normalizing the exceptional: incorporating the "abortion pill" into mainstream medicine," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 56(12), pages 2353-2366, June.
    6. Armstrong, David, 2002. "Clinical autonomy, individual and collective: the problem of changing doctors' behaviour," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 55(10), pages 1771-1777, November.
    7. Lambert, Helen, 2006. "Accounting for EBM: Notions of evidence in medicine," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(11), pages 2633-2645, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Perrotta, Manuela & Geampana, Alina, 2020. "The trouble with IVF and randomised control trials: Professional legitimation narratives on time-lapse imaging and evidence-informed care," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 258(C).
    2. Diamond-Brown, Lauren, 2018. "“It can be challenging, it can be scary, it can be gratifying”: Obstetricians’ narratives of negotiating patient choice, clinical experience, and standards of care in decision-making," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 205(C), pages 48-54.
    3. Baeza, Juan I. & Boaz, Annette & Fraser, Alec, 2016. "The roles of specialisation and evidence-based practice in inter-professional jurisdictions: A qualitative study of stroke services in England, Sweden and Poland," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 15-23.
    4. Diego Alejandro Estrada-Mesa & Luis Felipe Higuita-Gutiérrez & Jaiberth Antonio Cardona-Arias, 2025. "Clinical Practice Guidelines as a Medical Profession Government Technology in Medellín, Colombia," Societies, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-18, May.
    5. Moes, Floortje & Houwaart, Eddy & Delnoij, Diana & Horstman, Klasien, 2020. "Questions regarding ‘epistemic injustice’ in knowledge-intensive policymaking: Two examples from Dutch health insurance policy," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 245(C).
    6. Ferlie, Ewan & Mcgivern, Gerry & FitzGerald, Louise, 2012. "A new mode of organizing in health care? Governmentality and managed networks in cancer services in England," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 74(3), pages 340-347.
    7. Silje Gustafsson & Irene Vikman & Stefan Sävenstedt & Jesper Martinsson, 2015. "Perceptions of needs related to the practice of self‐care for minor illness," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(21-22), pages 3255-3265, November.
    8. Broom, Alex & Adams, Jon & Tovey, Philip, 2009. "Evidence-based healthcare in practice: A study of clinician resistance, professional de-skilling, and inter-specialty differentiation in oncology," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 192-200, January.
    9. Nigam, Amit, 2013. "How institutional change and individual researchers helped advance clinical guidelines in American health care," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 16-22.
    10. Behague, Dominique & Tawiah, Charlotte & Rosato, Mikey & Some, Télésphore & Morrison, Joanna, 2009. "Evidence-based policy-making: The implications of globally-applicable research for context-specific problem-solving in developing countries," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(10), pages 1539-1546, November.
    11. Lambert, Helen, 2006. "Accounting for EBM: Notions of evidence in medicine," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(11), pages 2633-2645, June.
    12. Mykhalovskiy, Eric & Armstrong, Pat & Armstrong, Hugh & Bourgeault, Ivy & Choiniere, Jackie & Lexchin, Joel & Peters, Suzanne & White, Jerry, 2008. "Qualitative research and the politics of knowledge in an age of evidence: Developing a research-based practice of immanent critique," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 195-203, July.
    13. Chandler, Clare I.R. & Mangham, Lindsay & Njei, Abanda Ngu & Achonduh, Olivia & Mbacham, Wilfred F. & Wiseman, Virginia, 2012. "‘As a clinician, you are not managing lab results, you are managing the patient’: How the enactment of malaria at health facilities in Cameroon compares with new WHO guidelines for the use of malaria tests," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 74(10), pages 1528-1535.
    14. Teghtsoonian, Katherine, 2009. "Depression and mental health in neoliberal times: A critical analysis of policy and discourse," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 28-35, July.
    15. Diamond-Brown, Lauren, 2016. "The doctor-patient relationship as a toolkit for uncertain clinical decisions," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 108-115.
    16. repec:plo:pone00:0202776 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Li, Xilin & Hsee, Christopher K., 2021. "Free-riding and cost-bearing in discrimination," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 80-90.
    18. Andreassen, Hege K., 2011. "What does an e-mail address add? - Doing health and technology at home," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(4), pages 521-528, February.
    19. Héctor Alberto Botello-Penaloza & Isaac Guerrero-Rinc�n, 2019. "Las leyes de licencia de maternidad y el mercado laboral en Colombia," Revista Economía y Región, Universidad Tecnológica de Bolívar, vol. 13(1), pages 67-86.
    20. Blume, Stuart & Tump, Janneke, 2010. "Evidence and policymaking: The introduction of MMR vaccine in the Netherlands," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 71(6), pages 1049-1055, September.
    21. Baert, Stijn, 2017. "Hiring Discrimination: An Overview of (Almost) All Correspondence Experiments Since 2005," GLO Discussion Paper Series 61, Global Labor Organization (GLO).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:69:y:2009:i:1:p:21-27. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.