Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42272100›Full record

ArticleSociology of health & illness2026

From Scale to Situated: Sociotechnical Imaginaries and the Configuration of Algorithmic Health Research.

Kate Lyle, Gabrielle Samuel, Anneke Lucassen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Kate LyleNuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9265-7648
Gabrielle SamuelGlobal Health and Social Medicine, Kings College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8111-2730
Anneke LucassenNuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3324-4338

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/X021351/1Wellcome Trust 208053/Z/17/ZWellcome Trust 222180/Z/20/Z
6 · The paper itself

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

AlgorithmsBig DataHealth Services ResearchHumansInterviews as TopicQualitative ResearchUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID42272100
PMCPMC13254224

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.