ArticleSociology of health & illness2024
Decision-making as discovery: Vetting clinical research in a leading precision oncology service.
Article in Sociology of health & illness, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Blurring boundaries or structural coupling? Revisiting the science-medicine interface through the analogy of politics and law.Frontiers in sociology · 2026Article
- The Role of Algorithms in Molecular Tumour Boards-Managing the Gap Between Research and Clinic in Precision Medicine.Sociology of health & illness · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Based on fieldwork carried out at the Early Drug Development Service of a world-leading cancer institution, our study sheds lights on decision-making processes at the stage where decisions are made about which clinical trial to pursue and thus which experimental drugs will feed the growing pipeline of molecularly guided therapies and therapeutic strategies available to treating physicians. The paper shows how such collective decision-making practices by a translational research unit employ formal tools and ad hoc valuation strategies that interweave technical-scientific matters of concern with patient-oriented clinical ones, as part of the institutional assetization of biomedical knowledge production. In the process, decision-making practices in part define the conditions of possibility for the provision of care in what is increasingly becoming a 'clinic of variants.' They do so by reconfiguring on an evolving basis the socio-material ecosystem through which precision oncology is enacted as a rapidly evolving assemblage of patients, physicians, research and support staff, protocols, molecular markers, drugs and administrative components.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.