Medicine as Science

Schlagworte

Arzt Beruf Erwartung ethics Medizinethik profession science policy discourse historical semantics identity work boundary work scientific profession life sciences clinical science laboratory science academic disciplines scientific medicine biomedicine

• Abbott, Andrew. 2001. Chaos of Disciplines. Chicago/London: Chicago University Press.
• Ahrens, Edward H. 1992. The Crisis in Clinical Research. Overcoming Institutional Obstacles. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Amsterdamska, Olga. 2005. Demarcating Epidemiology. Science, Technology, & Human Values 30(1) Special Issue: Demarcation Socialized. Constructing Boundaries and Recognizing Difference: 17–51.
• Amundsen, Darrel W. 1979. Medicine and Surgery as Art or Craft. The Role of Schematic Literature in the Separation of Medicine and Surgery in the Late Middle Ages. Transactions & Studies of the College of Physicians of Philadelphia 1(1): 43–57.
• Appel, Toby A. 1987. Biological and Medical Societies and the Founding of the American Physiological Society. Physiology in the American Context, 1850–1940. Ed. Gerald L. Geison. New York: Springer. 155–176.
• Appel, Toby A. 1991. Organizing Biology. The American Society of Naturalists and its “Affiliated Societies”, 1883–1923. The American Development of Biology. Ed. Ronald Rainger / Keith R. Benson / Jane Maienschein. New Brunswick/London: Rutgers University Press. 87–120.
• Appel, Toby A. 2000. Shaping Biology. The National Science Foundation and American Biological Research, 1945–1975. Baltimore/London: Johns Hopkins University Press.
• Armstrong, David. 2007. Professionalism, Indeterminacy and the EBM Project. BioSocieties 2(1): 73–84.
• Ash, Mitchell G. 2019. Interdisciplinarity in Historical Perspective. Perspectives on Science 27(4): 619–642.
• Barker, Lewellys F. 1908. Medical Laboratories. Their Relations to Medical Practice and Medical Discovery. Science 27(694): 601–611.
• Barker, Lewellys F. 1913. On the Cultivation of the Clinical Sciences of Diagnosis and Therapy. Science 37(959): 731–738.
• Barker, Lewellys F. 1916. Relation of the Preclinical Laboratory Courses to the Work of the Clinical Years. JAMA 66(9): 631–635.
• Barnes, Barry / Bloor, David / Henry, John. 1996. Scientific Knowledge. A Sociological Analysis. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press.
• Becher, Tony / Trowler, Paul R. 2001. Academic Tribes and Territories. Intellectual Enquiry and the Culture of Disciplines. 2nd ed. Maidenhead: The Society for Research into Higher Education / Open University Press.
• Benson, Keith R. 1991. From Museum Research to Laboratory Research. The Transformation of Natural History into Academic Biology. The American Development of Biology. Ed. Ronald Rainger / Keith R. Benson / Jane Maienschein. New Brunswick/London: Rutgers University Press. 49–83.
• Berliner, Howard S. 1985. A System of Scientific Medicine. Philanthropic Foundations in the Flexner Era. New York/London: Travistock.
• Bleker, Johanna. 1981. Die Naturhistorische Schule, 1825–1645. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der klinischen Medizin in Deutschland. Stuttgart: Fischer.
• Bleker, Johanna. 1987/88. Medical Students – to the Bed-Side or to the Laboratory? The Emergence of Laboratory-Training in German Medical Education, 1870–1900. Clio Medica 21(1/4): 35–46.
• Benaroyo, Lazare. 1998. Rudolf Virchow and the Scientific Approach to Medicine. Endeavour 22(3). 114–116.
• Bonner, Thomas N. 1990. The German Model of Training Physicians in the United States, 1870–1914. How Closely was it Followed? Bulletin of the History of Medicine 64(1): 18–34.
• Bonner, Thomas N. 1995a. Becoming a Physician. Medical Education in Britain, France, Germany, and the United States, 1750–1945. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Bonner, Thomas N. 1995b. German Influences on American Clinical Medicine, 1870–1914. German Influences on Education in the United States to 1917. Ed. Henry Geitz / Jürgen Heideking / Jurgen Herbst. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 275–287.
• Borck, Cornelius. 2020. Negotiating Epistemic Hierarchies in Biomedicine: The Rise and Fall of Evidence-based Medicine. Weak Knowledge: Forms, Functions, and Dynamics. Ed. Moritz Epple / Annette Imhausen / Falk Müller. Frankfurt/New York: Campus. 449–482.
• Bourdieu, Pierre. 1975. The Specificity of the Scientific Field and the Social Conditions of the Progress of Reason. Social Science Information 14(6). 19–47.
• Bourdieu, Pierre. 1990. The Logic of Practice. Cambridge: Polity Press.
• Bourdieu, Pierre / Wacquant, Loïc J.D. 1992. An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press.
• Broman, Thomas. 1989. University Reform in Medical Thought at the End of the Eighteenth Century. Osiris 5: 36–53.
• Broman, Thomas. 1991. J. C. Reil and the “Journalization” of Physiology. The Literary Structure of Scientific Arguments. Historical Studies. Ed. Peter Dear. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
• Broman, Thomas. 1996. The Transformation of German Academic Medicine, 1750–1820. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Bruchhausen, Walter. 2010. “Biomedizin” in sozial- und kulturwissenschaftlichen Beiträgen. Eine Begriffskariere zwischen Analyse und Polemik. N.T.M. 18.
• Bud, Robert. 2007. Penicillin. Triumph and Tragedy. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
• Bud, Robert. 2014. Applied Science in Nineteenth-Century Britain. Public Discourse and the Creation of Meaning, 1817–1876. History and Technology 30(4): 1–34.
• Bush, Vannevar. 1995 [1945]. Science – The Endless Frontier. North Stratford, N.H.: Ayer Company Publishers.
• Butler, Declan. 2008. Translational Research. Crossing the Valley of Death. Nature 453: 840–842.
• Bylebyl, Jerome J. 1990. The Medical Meaning of Physica. Osiris 6: 16–41.
• Bynum; William. 1994. Science and the Practice of Medicine in the Nineteenth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Cahan, David (ed.). 2003. From Natural Philosophy to the Sciences. Writing the History of Nineteenth-Century Science. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press.
• Cambrosio, Alberto / Keating, Peter / Schlich, Thomas / Weisz, George. 2006. Regulatory Objectivity and the Generation and Management of Evidence in Medicine. Social Science & Medicine 63: 189–199.
• Chadarevian, Soraya de / Kamminga, Harmke (eds.). 1998. Molecularizing Biology and Medicine. New Perspectives and Alliances, 1910s-1970s. Amsterdam: Harwood.
• Chalmers, Iain / Glasziou, Paul. 2009. Avoidable Waste in the Production and Reporting of Research Evidence. The Lancet 374: 86–89.
• Clarke, Adele E. / Shim, Janet K. / Mamo, Laura / Fosket, Jennifer Ruth / Fishman / Jennifer R. 2003. Biomedicalization. Technoscientific Transformations of Health, Illness, and US Biomedicine. American Sociological Review 68(2). 161–194.
• Clarke, Sabine. 2010. Pure Science with a Practical Aim. The Meanings of Fundamental Research in Britain, circa 1916–1950. Isis 101(2): 285–311.
• Cohen, Michael Aaron / Stavri, P. Zoë / Hersch, William R. 2004. A Categorization and Analysis of The Criticisms of Evidence-Based Medicine. International Journal of Medical Informatics 73: 35–43.
• Coleman, William. 1988. Prussian Pedagogy. Purkyně at Breslau, 1823–1829. The Investigative Enterprise. Experimental Physiology in Nineteenth-Century Medicine. Ed. William Coleman / Frederic L. Holmes. Berkley et al.: University of California Press. 15–64.
• Cooper, Joseph D. 1965. Onward the Management of Science. The Woolridge Report. Science 148(3676): 1433–1439.
• Crabu, Stefano. 2018. Rethinking Biomedicine in the Age of Translational Research. Organizational, Professional, and Epistemic Encounters. Sociology Compass e12623. doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12623.
• Cunningham, Andrew. 2002. The pen and the sword. Recovering the disciplinary identity of physiology and anatomy before 1800. I: Old physiology – the pen. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 33: 631–665.
• Cunningham, Andrew. 2003. The pen and the sword. Recovering the disciplinary identity of physiology and anatomy before 1800. II: Old anatomy – the sword. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 34: 51–76.
• Daly, Jeanne. 2005. Evidence-Based Medicine and the Search for a Science of Clinical Care. Berkley et al.: University of California Press/Milbank Memorial Fund.
• Davis, Nathan S. 1891. The Basis of Scientific Medicine and the Proper Methods of Investigation. JAMA 16(4): 114–120.
• Dewey, John. 1910. Science as Subject-Matter and as Method. Science 31(787): 121–127.
• Dewey, John. 1997. How We Think. Mineola: Dover.
• Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. 1992. Evidence-based medicine. A new approach to teaching the practice of medicine. JAMA 268(17): 2420–2425.
• Feinstein, Alvan. 1995. The Crisis in Clinical Research. Review Essay. Bulletin of the History of Medicine 69(2): 288–291.
• Felt, Ulrike / Igelsböck, Judith / Schikowitz, Andrea / Völker, Thomas. 2013. Growing into What? The (Un-)disciplined Socialization of Early Stage Researchers into Transdisciplinary Research. Higher Education 65(4): 511–524.
• Felt, Ulrike / Fouché, Rayvon / Miller, Clark A. / Smith-Doerr, Laurel (eds.). 2017. Handbook of Science and Technology Studies. 4th ed. Cambridge, MA/London: MIT Press.
• Flexner, Abraham. 1910. Medical Education in the United States and Canada. A Report to the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. New York.
• Foucault, Michel. 1973. The Birth of the Clinic. An Archeology of Medical Perception. Trans. A. M. Sheridan. New York: Routledge.
• French, Roger, 2003. Medicine Before Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Frevert, Ute. 1984. Krankheit als politisches Problem, 1770–1880. Soziale Unterschichten in Preußen zwischen medizinischer Polizei und staatlicher Sozialversicherung. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
• Funtowicz, Silvio O. / Ravetz, Jerome R. 1993. The Emergence of Post-Normal Science. Science, Politics and Morality. Scientific Uncertainty and Decision-Making. Ed. René von Schomberg. Dodrecht et al.: Kluwer. 85–123.
• Fye, Bruce. 1987. The Development of American Physiology. Scientific Medicine in the Nineteenth Century. Baltimore/London: Johns Hopkins University Press.
• Galison, Peter / Stump, David J. (eds.). 1996. The Disunity of Science. Boundaries, Contexts, and Power. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
• Geertz, Clifford. 1983. Local Knowledge. Further Essays in Interpretive Anthropology. New York: Basic Books.
• Geison, Gerald. 1979. Divided We Stand. Physiologists and Clinicians in the American Context. The Therapeutic Revolution. Essays in the Social History of American Medicine. Ed. Morris J. Vogel / Charles E. Rosenberg. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. 67–90.
• Glasziou, Paul / Chalmers, Iain. 2018. Research Wast is Still a Scandal. BMJ 363: k4645.
• Gibbons, Michael / Limoges, Camille / Nowotny, Helga / Schwartzman, Simon / Scott, Peter / Trow, Martin. 1994. The New Production of Knowledge. The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. Los Angeles et al.: Sage.
• Gieryn, Thomas F. 1995. Boundaries of Science. Handbook of Science and Technology Studies. Ed. Sheila Jasanoff / Gerald E. Markle / James C. Petersen / Trevor Pinch. Rev. e ed. Thousand Oaks et al: Sage. 393–443
• Gieryn, Thomas F. 1999. Cultural Boundaries of Science. Credibility on the Line. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press.
• Godin, Benoît. 2006. The Linear Model of Innovation. The Historical Construction of an Analytical Framework. Science, Technology, & Human Values 31(6). 639–667.
• Godin, Benoît. 2017. Models of Innovation. The History of an Idea. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Greenhalgh, Susan. 2008. Just One Child. Science and Policy in Deng’s China. Berkley/Los Angeles: University of California Press.
• Hackett, Edward J. / Parker, John N. / Vermeulen, Niki / Penders, Bart. 2017. The Social and Epistemic Organization of Scientific Work. Handbook of Science and Technology Studies. 4th ed. Ed. Ulrike Felt, and Ulrike / Fouché, Rayvon / Miller, Clark A. / Smith-Doerr, Laurel. Cambridge, MA/London: MIT Press. 733–764.
• Hacking, Ian. 1992. The Self-Vindication of the Laboratory Sciences. Science and Practice and Culture. Ed. Andrew Pickering. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press. 29–64.
• Hacking, Ian. 2012. Introductory Essay. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Kuhn 2012). 4th ed. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press. vii–xxxviii.
• Hagner, Michael. 2003. Scientific Medicine. From Natural Philosophy to the Sciences. Writing History of Nineteenth-Century Science. Ed. David Cahan. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press. 49–87.
• Harris, Henry. 1999. The Birth of the Cell. New Haven/London: Yale University Press.
• Harris, Roy. 2005. The Semantics of Science. London/New York: Continuum.
• Harvey, A. McGhehee. 1981. Science at the Bedside. Clinical Research in American Medicine, 1905–1945. Baltimore/London: Johns Hopkins University Press.
• Heinig, Stephen J. / Quon, Andrew S. W. / Meyer, Roger E. / Korn, David. 1999. The Changing Landscape of Clinical Research. Academic Medicine 74(6): 726–745.
• Heller, Robert. 1975. Johann Christian Reil’s Training Scheme for Medical Auxiliaries. Medical History 19(4): 321–332.
• Hendriks, Barbara / Simons, Arno / Reinhart, Martin. 2019. What are Clinician-Scientists Expected to Do? The Undefined Space of Professionalizable Work in Translational Biomedicine. Minerva 57: 219–237.
• Henle, Jacob. 1844. Medizinische Wissenschaft und Empirie. Zeitschrift für rationelle Medizin 1: 1–35.
• Hess, Volker. 1993. Von der semiotischen zur diagnostischen Medizin. Die Entstehung der klinischen Methode zwischen 1750 und 1850. Husum: Matthisen.
• Hess, Volker. 1994. Objektivität und Rhetorik. Karl August Wunderlich (1815–1877) und die klinische Thermometrie. Medizinhistorisches Journal 32(3/4). 299–319.
• Hess, Volker. 1995. Diagnose und Krankheitsverständnis der medizinischen Klinik der Berliner Universität, 1820–1845. Abhandlungen zur Geschichte der Medizin und Naturwissenschaften 67: 101–10.
• Hess, Volker. 2010a. Die Alte Charité, die moderne Irrenabteilung und die Klinik (1790–1820). Die Charité. Geschichte(n) eines Krankenhauses. Ed. Johanna Bleker / Volker Hess. Berlin Akademie Verlag. 44–69.
• Volker Hess. 2010b. Fieberbehandlung und klinische Wissenschaft (1820–1850). Die Charité. Geschichte(n) eines Krankenhauses. Ed. Johanna Bleker / Volker Hess. Berlin Akademie Verlag. 70–98.
• Hippocrates. 2012. On the Art of Medicine. Ed., trans., & commentary Joel E. Mann. Leiden/Boston: Brill.
• Höpfner, Ludwig Julius Friedrich, 1778. Deutsche Encyclopädie oder Allgemeines Real-Wörterbuch aller Künste und Wissenschaften. Vol. 1: A–Ar. Frankfurt/Main: Varrentrap und Wenner.
• Huerkamp, Claudia. 1985. Aufstieg der Ärzte. Vom Gelehrten Stand zum professionellen Experten. Das Beispiel Preußens. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
• von Humboldt, Wilhelm. 1964. Über die Organisation des Medizinalwesens. Schriften zur Politik und zum Bildungswesen (Werke in Fünf Bänden IV). Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft. 56–63.
• Jacobs, Jerry A. 2013. In Defense of Disciplines. Interdisciplinarity and Specialization in the Research University. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press.
• Jasanoff, Sheila (ed.). 2004. States of Knowledge. The Co-Production of Science and Social Order. London/New York: Routledge.
• Jasanoff, Sheila / Kim, Sang-Hyun (eds.). 2015. Dreamscapes of Modernity. Sociotechnical Imaginaries and the Fabrication of Power. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press.
• Kaldewey, David. 2013. Wahrheit und Nützlichkeit. Selbstbeschreibungen der Wissenschaft zwischen Autonomie und gesellschaftlicher Relevanz. Bielefeld: transcript.
• Kaldewey, David. 2018: The Grand Challenges Discourse. Transforming Identity Work in Science and Science Policy. Minerva 56: 161–182.
• Kaldewey, David / Schauz, Désirée (eds.). 2018. Basic and Applied Research. The Language of Science Policy in the Twentieth Century. New York/Oxford: Berghahn.
• Kaldewey, David / Schauz, Désirée. 2018. Transforming Pure Science into Basic Research. The Language of Science Policy in the United States. Basic and Applied Research. The Language of Science Policy in the Twentieth Century. Ed. David Kaldewey / Désirée Schauz. New York/Oxford: Berghahn. 104–140.
• Kay, Lilly, 1993. The Molecular Vision of Life. Caltech, The Rockefeller Foundation, and the Rise of the New Biology. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Keating, Peter / Cambrosio, Alberto. 2003. Biomedical Platforms. Realigning the normal and the pathological in late-twentieth-century medicine. Cambridge, MA/London: MIT Press.
• Keating, Peter / Cambrosio, Alberto. 2004. Does biomedicine entail the successful reduction of pathology to biology? Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 47(3): 357–371.
• Keating, Peter / Cambrosio, Alberto. 2012. Cancer on Trial. Oncology as a New Style of Practice. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press.
• Knaapen, Loes. 2014. Evidence-based Medicine or Cookbook Medicine? Addressing Concerns over the Standardization of Care. Sociology Compass 8(6): 823–836.
• Knorr Cetina, Karin / Reichmann, Werner. 2015. Art. “Epistemic Cultures.” International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. Ed. James D. Wright. Second Ed. Vol. 7. Amsterdam: Elsevier. 873–880.
• Knorr Cetina, Karin. 1981. The Manufacture of Knowledge. An Essay on the Constructivist and Contextual Nature of Science. Oxford et al.: Pergamon Press.
• Knorr Cetina, Karin. 1999. Epistemic Cultures. How the Sciences Make Knowledge. Cambridge/Londong: Harvard University Press.
• Kohler, Robert E. 1979. From Medical Chemistry to Biochemistry. The Making of a Biomedical Discipline. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Kohler, Robert E. 1982. Medical Reform and Biomedical Science. Biochemistry – A Case Study. The Therapeutic Revolution. Essays in the Social History of American Medicine. Ed. Morris J. Vogel / Charles E. Rosenberg. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. 27–66.
• Kohler, Robert E. 1991. Partners in Science. Foundations and Natural Scientists, 1900–1945. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press.
• Koselleck, Reinhart. 1979. Vergangene Zukunft. Zur Semantik geschichtlicher Zeiten. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
• Koselleck, Reinhart. 2006. Begriffsgeschichten. Studien zur Semantik und Pragmatik der politischen und sozialen Sprache. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
• Kraft, Alison. 2013. New Light Through an Old Window? The “Translational Turn” in Biomedical Research. A Historical Perspective. Translational Medicine. The Future of Therapy? Ed. James Mittra / Christopher-Paul Milne. Boca Raton: CRC Press. 19–53.
• Kremer, Richard L. 2009. Physiology. The Cambridge History of Science. Volume 6: The Modern Biological and Earth Sciences. Ed. Peter J. Bowler / John V. Pickstone. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 342–366.
• Kuhn, Thomas S. 2012. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 4th ed. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press.
• Latour, Bruno. 1987. Science in Action. How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
• Latour, Bruno. 1998. From the World of Science to the World of Research? Science 280: 208–209.
• Latour, Bruno / Woolgar, Steve. 1986. Laboratory Life. The Construction of Scientific Facts. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
• Lawrence, Christopher. 1985. Incommunicable Knowledge. Science, Technology, and the Clinical Art in Britain, 1850–1914. Journal of Contemporary History 20(4): 503–520.
• Leng, Gareth / Leng, Rhodri Ivor. 2020. The Matter of Facts. Skepticism, Persuasion, and Evidence in Science. Cambridge/London: MIT Press.
• Lenoir, Timothy. 1997. Instituting Science. The Cultural Production of Scientific Disciplines. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
• Lindemann, Mary. 1996. Healing & Health in Eighteenth Century Germany. Baltimore/London: Johns Hopkins University Press.
• Lohff, Brigitte. 1981. Johannes Müllers “Jahresberichte zur Physiologie” in Müllers Archiv der Jahre 1834–1838. Sudhoffs Archiv 65(1): 32–78.
• Löwy, Ilana. 2011. Historiography of Biomedicine. “Bio”, “Medicine”, and In Between. Isis 102(1): 116–122.
• Löwy, Ilana. 1996. Between Bench and Bedside. Science, Healing, and Interlukin-2 in a Cancer Ward. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Ludmerer, Kenneth M. 1996. Learning to Heal. The Development of American Medical Education. Baltimore/Londong: Johns Hopkins University Press.
• Marks, Howard M. 1997. The Progress of Experiment. Science and Therapeutic Reform in the United States, 1900–1990. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Mattingly, Paul H. 2017. American Academic Cultures. A History of Higher Education. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press.
• Maulitz, Russel C. 1978. Rudolf Virchow, Julius Cohnheim and the Program of Pathology. Bulletin of the History of Medicine 52. 162–182.
• Maulitz, Russel C. 1979. “Physician versus Bacteriologist.” The Ideology of Science in Clinical Medicine. The Therapeutic Revolution. Essays in the Social History of American Medicine. Ed. Morris J. Vogel / Charles E. Rosenberg. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. 91–107.
• McClelland, Charles E. 1980. State, Society, and University in Germany 1700–1914. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• McClelland, Charles E. 2013. The German Model for American medical Reform. Themenportal Europäische Geschichte. www.europa.clio-online.de/essay/id/fdae-1594, accessed: 5. August 2020.
• Meltzer, Samuel J. 1909. The Science of Clinical Medicine. What It Ought to Be and the Men to Uphold It. JAMA 53(7): 508–512.
• Mittra, James. 2016. The New Health Bioeconomy. R&D Policy and Innovation for the Twenty-First Century. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Mittra, James / Milne, Christopher-Paul (eds.). 2013. Translational Medicine. The Future of Therapy? Boca Raton: CRC Press.
• Müller, Johannes. 1834. Jahresbericht über die Fortschritte der anatomisch-physiologischen Wissenschaft im Jahre 1833. Archiv für Anatomie, Physiologie und wissenschaftliche Medicin 1: 1–79.
• Müller, Ernst / Schmieder, Falko. 2016. Begriffsgeschichte und historische Semantik. Ein kritisches Kompendium. Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp.
• NIH Study Committee [Chairman: Dean E. Wooldrige]. 1965. Biomedical Science and its Political Administration. A Study of the National Institutes of Health. Washington, D.C. The White House.
• Nowotny, Helga / Scott, Peter / Gibbons, Michael. 2001. Re-Thinking Science. Knowledge and the Public in an Age of Uncertainty. Oxford: Polity.
• Nyhart, Lynn K. 1995. Biology Takes Form. Animal Morphology and the German Universities, 1800–1900. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press.
• Olesko, Kathryn M. 1988. Commentary. On Institutes Investigations, and Scientific Training. Investigative Enterprise. Experimental Physiology in Nineteenth-Century Medicine. Ed. William Coleman / Frederic L. Holmes. Berkley et al.: University of California Press. 295–332.
• Otis, Laura. 2007. Müller’s Lab. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
• Pauly, Philip J. 1984. The Appearance of Academic Biology in Late Nineteenth-Century America. Journal of the History of Biology 17(3): 369–397.
• Pauly, Philip J. 1987. General Physiology and the Discipline of Physiology, 1890–1935. Physiology in the American Context, 1850–1940. Ed. Gerald L. Geison. New York: Springer. 195–207.
• Park, Buhm Soon. 2008. Disease Categories and Scientific Disciplines. Reorganizing the NIH Intramural Program, 1945–1960. Biomedicine in the Twentieth Century. Practices, Policies, and Politics. Ed. Caroline Hannaway. Amsterdam et al.: IOS Press.
• Pestre, Dominique. 2003. Regimes of Knowledge Production in Society. Towards a More Political and Social Reading. Minerva 41(3): 245–261.
• Pickstone, John V. 2000. Ways of Knowing. A New History of Science, Technology and Medicine. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
• Phillips, Denise. 2012. Acolytes of Nature. Defining Natural Science in Germany 1770–1850. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press.
• Phillip, Denise. 2015. Francis Bacon and the Germans. Stories from When ‘science’ meant ‘Wissenschaft’. History of Science 53(4): 378–394.
• Pickering, Andrew (ed.). 1992. Science as Practice and Culture. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press.
• Prüll, Cay-Rüdiger. 2000. Zwischen Krankenversorgung und Forschungsprimat. Die Pathologie
• Quirke, Vivienne / Gaudillière, Jean-Paul. 2008. The Era of Biomedicine. Science, medicine and public health in Britain and France after the Second World War. Medical History 52: 441–452.
• Rabier, Christelle. 2018. Medicalizing the Surgical Trade, 1650–1820. Workers, Knowledge, Markets and Politics. The Palgrave Handbook of the History of Surgery. Ed. Thomas Schlich. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 71–94.
• Rasmussen, Nicolas. 2018. Biomedicine and Its Historiography. A Systematic Review. Handbook of the History of Biology. Ed. Michael Dietrich / Mark Borrello / Oren Harman. Cham: Springer Nature.
• Reil, Johann Christian. 1804. Pepinieren zum Unterricht ärztlicher Routiniers als Bedürfnisse des Staats nach seiner Lage wie sie ist. Halle/Saale: Curtsche Buchhandlung.
• Reil, Johann Christian. 1910. Entwurf zur Organisation einer wissenschaftlich-medizinischen Schule. Geschichte der königlichen Friedrich-Wilhelmsuniversität zu Berlin. Ed. Max Lenz. Vol. 3. Halle/Saale: Verlag der Buchhandlung des Waisenhauses.
• Reiser, Stanley Joel. 1979. Medicine and the Reign of Technology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Rheinberger, Hans-Jörg. 1997. Towards A History of Epistemic Things. Synthesizing Proteins in the Test Tube. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
• Rheinberger, Hans-Jörg. 2009. Recent Science and its Exploration: The Case of Molecular Biology. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 40: 6–12.
• Rosenberg, Charles E. 1997. No Other Gods. On Science and American Social Thought. 2. ed. Baltimore/London: Johns Hopkins University Press.
• Roser, Wilhelm / Wunderlich, Karl. 1841. Ueber die Mängel der heutigen deutschen Medicin. Programm einer neuen medicinischen Zeitschrift. Stuttgart: Ebner & Seubert.
• Roser, Wilhelm / Wunderlich, Karl. 1843. Ueber die jetzige Lage der physiologischen Medizin. Archiv für Physiologische Heilkunde 2: 1–5.
• Roth, Phillip H. 2022. Disziplinen und Kulturen der Wissenschaft. Wissenschaftsforschung. Grundbegriffe, Forschungsfelder und Forschungsfragen (Sozialwissenschaftliche Einführungen 4). Ed. David Kaldewey. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Oldenbourg (forthcoming).
• Sackett, David L. / Rosenberg, William M.C. / Gray, J. A. Muir / Haynes, R. Brian / Richardson, W. Scott. 1996. Evidence Based Medicine. What it Is and What it Isn’t. BMJ 312: 71–72.
• Schaffer, Simon. 1990. Genius in Romantic Natural Philosophy. Romanticism and the Sciences. Ed. Andrew Cunningham / Nicholas Jardine. Cambridge: Cambrdige University Press. 82–100-
• Schatzberg, Eric. 2018. Technology. Critical History of a Concept. Chicago/London: Chicago.
• Schauz, Désirée. 2014. What is Basic Research? Insights from Historical Semantics. Minerva 52(3): 273–328.
• Schauz, Désirée. 2015. Wissenschaftsgeschichte und das Revival der Begriffsgeschichte. N.T.M. 22(3): 53–63.
• Schauz, Désirée. 2020. Nützlichkeit und Erkenntnisfortschritt. Eine Geschichte des modernen Wissenschaftsverständnisses (Deutsches Museum, Abhandlungen und Berichte 33). Göttingen: Wallstein.
• Schauz, Désirée / Kaldewey, David. 2018. Why Do Concepts Matter to Science Policy? Basic and Applied Research. The Language of Science Policy in the Twentieth Century. Ed. David Kaldewey / Désirée Schauz. 2018. New York/Oxford: Berghahn. 1–32.
• Schauz, Désirée / Lax, Gregor. 2018. Professional Devotion, National Needs, Fascist Claims, and Democratic Values. The Language of Science Policy in Germany. Basic and Applied Research. The Language of Science Policy in the Twentieth Century. Ed. David Kaldewey / Désirée Schauz. 2018. New York/Oxford: Berghahn. 104–140.
• Schechter, Alan N. / Perlman, Robert / Rettig, Richard A. 2004. Editor’s Introduction. Why is Revitilizing Clinical Research Is So Important, Yet So Difficult? Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 47(4): 476–486.
• Scheffler, Robin W. / Strasser, Bruno J. 2015. Art. “Biomedical Sciences, History and Sociology of.” International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. Ed. James D. Wright. Second Ed. Vol. 2. Amsterdam: Elsevier. 663–669.
• Schelling, Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph. 1974. Vorlesungen über die Methode des akademischen Studiums. Hamburg: Meiner.
• Schelling, Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph / Marcus, Friedrich Adalbert (eds.). 1805–08. Jahrbücher der Medicin als Wissenschaft. Tübingen.
• Schelsky, Helmut. 1971. Einsamkeit und Freiheit. Idee und Gestalt der deutschen Universität und ihre Reform. 2. ed. Reinbeck: Rowohlt.
• Schmiedebach, Heinz-Peter. 1992. “Ist nicht wirklich diese ganze zersetzende Naturwissenschaft ein Irrweg?” Virchow und die Zellularpathologie. Medizinhistorisches Journal 27(1/2): 26–42.
• Schneider, William H. 2015. The Origin of the Medical Research Grant in the United States. The Rockefeller Foundation and the NIH Extramural Funding Program. Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences 70(2): 279–311.
• Schönlein, Johannes. 1926. Rede zur Eröffnung der medizinischen Klinik in Würzburg. Deutsche Ärzte-Reden aus dem 19. Jahrhundert. Ed. Erich Ebstein. Berlin: Springer, 6–12.
• Schweber, Libby. 2006. Disciplining Statistics. Demography and Vital Statistics in France and England, 1830–1885. Durham/London: Duke University Press.
• Shapin, Steven. 1992. Discipline and Bounding. The History and Sociology of Science as Seen Through the Externalism-Internalism Debate. History of Science 30: 333–369.
• Shapin, Steven. 2008. The Scientific Life. A Moral History of a Late Modern Vocation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Shapin, Steven. 2012. Never Pure. Historical Studies of Science as If It Was Produced by People with Bodies, Situated in Time, Space, Culture, and Society, and Struggling for Credibility and Authority. Baltimore/London: Johns Hopkins University Press.
• Shinn, Terry. 2002. The Triple Helix and New Production of Knowledge. Prepackaged Thinking on Science and Technology. Social Studies of Science 32(4): 599–614.
• Solomon, Miriam. 2011. Just a Paradigm. Evidence-Based Medicine in Epistemological Context. European Journal of Philosophy of Science 1(3): 451–466.
• Star, Susan Leigh / Griesmer, James R. 1989. Institutional Ecology, ‘Translations’ and Boundary Objects. Amateurs and Professionals in Berkley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907–39. Social Studies of Science 19(3): 387–420.
• Starr, Paul. 1982. The Social Transformation of American Medicine. The Rise of a Sovereign Profession and the Making of a Vast Industry. New York: Basic Books.
• Steelman, John R. 1947. The Nation’s Medical Research. A Report to the President. Washington, D.C.: US Government Printing Office.
• Stichweh, Rudolf. 1984. Zur Entstehung des modernen Systems wissenschaftlicher Disziplinen. Physik in Deutschland, 1740–1890. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.
• Stichweh, Rudolf. 1992. The Sociology of Scientific Disciplines. On the Genesis and Stability of the Disciplinary Structure of Modern Science. Science in Context 5(1): 3–15.
• Stichweh, Rudolf. 1994a. Professionen und Disziplinen. Formen der Differenzierung zweier Systeme beruflichen Handelns in modernen Gesellschaften. Wissenschaft, Universität, Profession. Soziologische Analysen. Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp. 278–336.
• Stichweh, Rudolf. 1994b. The Unity of Teaching and Research. Romanticism in the Science. Science in Europe, 1780–1840. Ed. Stefano Poggi / Maurizio Bossi. Dodrecht/Boston: Kluwer. 189–202.
• Stichweh, Rudolf. 2007. Einheit und Differenz im Wissenschaftssystem der Moderne. Zwei Kulturen der Wissenschaft – revisited. Ed. Jost Halfmann / Johannes Rohbeck. Weilerswits: Velbrück Wissenschaft. 213–228.
• Strasser, Bruno. 2014. Biomedicine. Meanings, assumptions, and possible futures. Report to the Swiss Science and Innovation Council.
• Sturdy, Steve. 2011. Looking for Trouble. Medical Science and Clinical Practice in the Historiography of Modern Medicine. Social History of Medicine 24(3): 739–757.
• Swain, Donald C. 1962. The Rise of a Research Empire. NIH, 1930 to 1950. Science 138(3546): 1233–1237.
• Timmermans, Stefan / Berg, Marc. 2003. The Gold Standard. The Challenge of Evidence-Based Medicine and Standardization of Health Care. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
• Timmermans, Stefan / Kolker, Emily S. 2004. Evidence-Based Medicine and the Reconfiguration of Medical Knowledge. Journal of Health and Social Behavior 45: 177–193.
• Trowler, Paul. 2014. Academic Tribes and Territories. The Theoretical Trajectory. Österreichische Zeitschrift für Geschichtswissenschaften 25(3). 17–26.
• Tuchman, Arleen Marcia. 1993. Science, Medicine, and the State in Germany. The Case of Baden, 1815–1871. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Tuchman, Arleen. 2000. Ein verwirrendes Dreieck. Universität, Charité, Pépinière. Jahrbuch für Universitätsgeschichte 3: 36–47.
• Turner, Stephen. 2000. What are Disciplines? And How is Interdisciplinarity Different? Interdisciplinarity. The Paradoxical Discourse. Practicing Interdisciplinarity. Ed. Perter Weingart / Nico Stehr. Toronto et al.: University of Toronto Press. 46–65.
• Turner, Stephen. 2017. Knowledge Formations. An Analytic Framework. The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity. 2nd ed. Ed. Robert Frodeman / Julie Thompson Klein / Roberto C. S. Pacheco. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 9–20.
• Turner, Steven R. 1980. Bildungsbürgertum and the Learned Professions in Prussia, 1770–1830. The Origins of a Class. Histoire Sociale Social History 12(25): 105–135.
• US Senate, Committee on Government Operations. 1959. The National Science Foundation and the Life Sciences. Washington, D.C.
• Van der Laan, Anna Laura / Boenink, Marianne. 2015. Beyond Bench and Bedside. Disentangling the Concept of Translational Research. Health Care Analysis 23: 32–49.
• Vignola-Gagné, Etienne. 2014. Argumentative Practices in Science, Technology and Innovation Policy. The Case of Clinician-Scientists and Translational Research. Science and Public Policy 41: 94–106.
• Virchow, Rudolf. 1847. Ueber die Standpunkte in der wissenschaftlichen Medicin. Archiv für pathologische Anatomie, Physiologie und klinische Medicin 1: 3–19.
• Virchow, Rudolf. 1849. Die naturwissenschaftliche Methode und die Standpunkte in der Therapie. Archiv für pathologische Anatomie, Physiologie und klinische Medicin 2: 3–37.
• Virchow, Rudolf. 1855. Cellular-Pathologie. Archiv für pathologische Anatomie, Physiologie und klinische Medicin 8: 3–39.
• Virchow, Rudolf. 1877. Ueber die Standpunkte in der wissenschaftlichen Medicin. Archiv für pathologische Anatomie, Physiologie und klinische Medicin 70(1): 1–10.
• Virchow, Rudolf. 1958. Disease, Life, and Man. Selected Essays by Rudolf Virchow. Trans. Lelland J. Rather. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
• Vogd, Werner. 2002. Professionalisierungsschub oder Auflösung ärztlicher Autonomie? Die Bedeutung von Evidence Based Medicine und der neuen Funktionalen Eliten in der Medizin aus system- und interaktionstheoretischer Perspektive. Zeitschrift für Soziologie 31(4): 294–315.
• Waddington, Ivan. 1990. The Movement Towards the Professionalization of Medicine. BMJ 301: 688–690.
• Wallis, Faith. 2018. Pre-Modern Surgery. Wounds, Words, and the Paradox of “Tradition”. The Palgrave Handbook of the History of Surgery. Ed. Thomas Schlich. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 49–70.
• Warner, John Harley. 1985. Science in Medicine. Osiris 1: 37–58.
• Warner, John Harley. 1986. The Therapeutic Perspective. Medical Practice, Knowledge, and Identity in America, 1820–1885. Cambridge, M.A./London: Harvard University Press.
• Warner, John Harley. 1991. Ideals of Science and their Discontents in Late Nineteenth-Century American Medicine. Isis 82(3): 454–478.
• Warner, John Harley. 1992. The Rise and Fall of Professional Mystery. Epistemology, authority and the emergence of laboratory medicine in nineteenth-century America. The Laboratory Revolution in Medicine. Ed. Andrew Cunningham / Perry Williams. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 110–141.
• Warner, John Harley. 1995. The History of Science and the Sciences of Medicine. Osiris 10: 164–193.
• Weingart, Peter. 2000. Interdisciplinarity. The Paradoxical Discourse. Practicing Interdisciplinarity. Ed. Perter Weingart / Nico Stehr. Toronto et al.: University of Toronto Press. 25–41.
• Weingart, Peter. 2010. A Short History of Knowledge Formations. The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity. Ed. Julie Thompson Klein / Carl Mitcham. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press. 3–14.
• Weisz, George. 2005. From Clinical Counting to Evidence-Based Medicine. Body Counts. Medical Quantification in Historical & Sociological Perspective. Ed. Gérard Jorland / Annick Opinel / George Weisz. Montreal et al.: McGill-Queen’s University Press. 377–393.
• Weisz, George. 2006. Divide and Conquer. A Comparative History of Medical Specialization. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
• Weisz, George / Cambrosio, Alberto / Keating, Peter / Knaapen, Loes / Schlich, Thomas / Tournay, Virginie J. 2007. The Emergence of Clinical Practice Guidelines. The Milbank Quarterly 85(4): 691–727.
• Wimmer, Mario. 2015. “Conceptual History: Begriffsgeschichte.” International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. Ed. James D. Wright. Second Ed. Vol. 2. Amsterdam: Elsevier. 548–554.
• Wilson-Kovacz, Dana / Hauskeller, Christine. 2012. The Clinician-Scientist. Professional Dynamics in Clinical Stem Cell Research. Sociology of Health & Illness 34(4): 497–512.
• Wunderlich, Karl. 1845. Das Verhältniss der physiologischen Medicin zur ärztlichen Praxis. Archiv für physiologische Heilkunde 4. 1–13.
• Zammito, John. 2018. The Gestation of German Biology. Physiology and Philosophy from Stahl to Schelling. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press.
• Zerhouni, Elias. 2003. The NIH Roadmap. Science 302: 63–72.