ArticleSociology of health & illness2026
From Scale to Situated: Sociotechnical Imaginaries and the Configuration of Algorithmic Health Research.
Article in Sociology of health & illness, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Contemporary healthcare systems generate vast volumes of data, with algorithmic interrogation promising disease prediction, improved diagnoses, and optimised treatment. Despite significant investment, biases in data used for algorithmic interrogation persist, leading to inequities in health outcomes. Scale alone cannot address these biases. Rather, considerations of the contextual dimensions of data need to be reflected upon. Nevertheless, calls for more data to 'iron out' such issues are common. Drawing on qualitative interviews with UK-based health data researchers, we use Lucy Suchman's concept of configuration to explore how sociotechnical imaginaries of 'big data', which lead to calls for more data, are sustained, operationalised and enacted in everyday research practice. Specifically, we identify three interconnected processes that sustain these imaginaries: (1) risk-oriented narratives that organise research around calculable futures; (2) decontextualising translation processes that align data with algorithmic requirements and (3) a persistent gap between algorithmic capacity and data availability. We conceptualise this third mechanism as a productive gap, as it continually renews commitments to scale by attributing limitations to insufficient data. We argue this gap represents a critical juncture for reconfiguration, revealing where assumptions about decontextualisation might be challenged to create space for more situated approaches to health data research.
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.