Fluids or flows? Information and qualculation in medical practice
Abstract
Purpose: Seeks to explore the assumptions and limitations of current programmes for the creation of electronic patient records by comparing ICT programme statements with hospital uses of information. Design/methodology/approach: Compares qualitative data from medical ICT programmes statements with data from ethnographic studies of hospital decision making. Uses actor‐network theory to develop a performative definition of information as that which secures a decision or “qualculation”, whether in the form of calculation or judgement. Findings: Shows that decision making depends on a mix of formal and informal considerations that are, however, always restricted in scope and number. Shows that some of these are locally and organisationally contingent. Research limitations/implications: The ethnographic findings illustrate the character of information rather than offering data about the character of decisions in different clinical locations. Practical implications: Caution is needed in the face of claims about ICT programmes in health care. It is possible to anticipate neither all the uses of information nor what will count as information in advance. Originality/value: The paper develops a performative definition of information. This is whatever secures a decision in practice. Information thus reflects a situated process of simplification and bounding of relevancies. This suggests that information not only flows (which is assumed in ICT programme statements) but also is fluid, unpredictably changing its form and character. This claim is relevant both to the design and use of ICT in health care and to the theory of information.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Algorithm journey maps might emphasize a specific perspective, amplifying existing power structures rather than allowing less-powerful stakeholders to have their experiences properly reflected.
“Second, and relatedly, algorithm journey maps might emphasize a specific perspective, amplifying existing power structures rather than allowing less-powerful stakeholders to have their experiences properly reflected22.”
From The algorithm journey map: a tangible approach to implementing AI solutions in healthcare (2024) · cites this paper as [22]
Cites
Austin, J. L. (1975) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198245537.001.0001 · Cited by 21,496 · see citing works
On Qualculation, Agency, and Otherness
Callon, M., & Law, J. (2005) · Environment and Planning D: Society and Space · doi:10.1068/d343t · Cited by 448 · see citing works
Self-citationLynch, M. (1988) · Human Studies · doi:10.1007/bf00177304 · Cited by 435 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
GREENHALGH, T., POTTS, H. W. W., WONG, G., BARK, P., & SWINGLEHURST, D. (2009) · The Milbank Quarterly · doi:10.1111/j.1468-0009.2009.00578.x · Cited by 541 · see citing works
The qualculative dimension of healthcare data interoperability
Pine, K. H. (2019) · Health Informatics Journal · doi:10.1177/1460458219833095 · Cited by 37 · see citing works
The algorithm journey map: a tangible approach to implementing AI solutions in healthcare
Boag, W., Hasan, A., Kim, J. Y., Revoir, M., Nichols, M., Ratliff, W., Gao, M., Zilberstein, S., Samad, Z., Hoodbhoy, Z., et al. (2024) · npj Digital Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41746-024-01061-4 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
The Map and the Territory: An Ethnographic Study of the Low Utilisation of a Global eHealth Network
Duclos, V. (2016) · Journal of Information Technology · doi:10.1057/jit.2016.3 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
- Authors
- Moser, I., & Law, J.
- Affiliations
- University of Oslo (NO)
- Lancaster University (GB)
- Venue
- Information Technology & People
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2006-01-01
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 55-73
- ISSN
- 0959-3845 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2036533501
- Cited by
- 71
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 9.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Information Technology and People (publishedVersion)
- Open Research Online - ORO (The Open University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Information Systems Theories and Implementation
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Knowledge Management and Technology
- Keywords
- electronic health records, medical information, actor-network theory, health information technology, information theory, clinical judgment
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review