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

Valuing Health Technology – New Value Spaces For Personal Health Systems To Support Active Ageing

Listed author(s):
  • Peine


  • Moors
Registered author(s):

    In this paper, we strive to unravel in how far current practices of Health Technology Assessment (HTA) are suitable to guide health policy decisions about personal health systems (PHS). We focus on the implicit representations of users and their position in the innovation process that underly established HTA practices, and explore in how far these representations are conducive to health technology decisions that support older people in meaningful and active lives. Our analysis builds on Callon’s recent distinction between prosthetic and habilitation social policies [M. Callon, Economic Markets and the Rise of Interactive Agencements: From Prosthetic Agencies to Habilitated Agencies, in: T. Pinch, R. Swedberg (Eds.), Living in a Material World: Economic Sociology Meets Science and Technology Studies, The MIT Press, Cambridge, 2008, pp. 29-56]. We revisit the results of two case studies that we conducted in the fields of Point-of-Care Diagnostics, set in the domains of primary and secondary care, and care robot service platforms operating in domestic environments. By contrasting these cases we demonstrate how a different logic of addressing values in innovation feeds into either prosthetic or habilitation policy decisions about health technology. Based on this analysis, we argue that HTA practices in the context of PHS need to incorporate a logic of valuing health technology in order to fully deliver the potential of PHS to the lives of older persons.

    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:
    File Function: Version February 2013
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies in its series Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series with number 13-02.

    in new window

    Date of creation: Sep 2013
    Date of revision: Sep 2013
    Handle: RePEc:uis:wpaper:1302
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    in new window

    1. Lambert, Helen & Gordon, Elisa J. & Bogdan-Lovis, Elizabeth A., 2006. "Introduction: Gift horse or Trojan horse? Social science perspectives on evidence-based health care," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(11), pages 2613-2620, June.
    2. Gordon, Elisa Jill, 2006. "The political contexts of evidence-based medicine: Policymaking for daily hemodialysis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(11), pages 2707-2719, June.
    3. Bombard, Yvonne & Abelson, Julia & Simeonov, Dorina & Gauvin, Francois-Pierre, 2011. "Eliciting ethical and social values in health technology assessment: A participatory approach," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 135-144, July.
    4. Banta, David, 2003. "The development of health technology assessment," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 121-132, February.
    5. Williams, Tracy & May, Carl & Mair, Frances & Mort, Maggie & Gask, Linda, 2003. "Normative models of health technology assessment and the social production of evidence about telehealth care," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 39-54, April.
    6. J. Barkley Rosser, 2009. "Introduction," Chapters,in: Handbook of Research on Complexity, chapter 1 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Goldenberg, Maya J., 2006. "On evidence and evidence-based medicine: Lessons from the philosophy of science," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(11), pages 2621-2632, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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:uis:wpaper:1302. 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: (Gaston Heimeriks)

    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.