Evaluation of new technology in the clinical microbiology laboratory

Jenkins, Stephen G.

doi:10.1016/0732-8893(95)00154-9

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although not offering specific definitions of the concept, earlier understandings of responsibility in innovation saw it as a means by which alternative, more sustainable forms of practice could be enabled. Here, examples relate to the agricultural sector (see Stinner et al 1992) and the evaluation of emerging technologies in the medical sector (see Jenkins 1995).…”

Section: An Overview Of Definitionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Robinson (2009) and Te Kulve and Rip (2011) connect RRI to Technology Assessment (TA) approaches, such as Constructive Technology Assessment (CTA), while Stahl (2012) highlights the importance of participatory technology assessment (pTA) for its implementation. Finally, to elaborate on an understanding of responsibility in research and innovation, earlier contributions relate its definition to more established practices such as health TA (Jenkins 1995) and, not surprisingly, research ethics (Chervenak and McCullough 2006;Zwart 2013).…”

Section: An Overview Of Definitionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Mobilising Concept? Unpacking Academic Representations of Responsible Research and Innovation

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper makes a plea for more reflexive attempts to develop and anchor the emerging concept of responsible research and innovation (RRI). RRI has recently emerged as a buzzword in science policy, becoming a focus of concerted experimentation in many academic circles. Its performative capacity means that it is able to mobilise resources and spaces despite no common understanding of what it is or should be 'made of'. In order to support reflection and practice amongst those who are interested in and using the concept, this paper unpacks understandings of RRI across a multi-disciplinary body of peer-reviewed literature. Our analysis focuses on three key dimensions of RRI (motivations, theoretical conceptualisations and translations into practice) that remain particularly opaque. A total of 48 publications were selected through a systematic literature search and their content was qualitatively analysed. Across the literature, RRI is portrayed as a concept that embeds numerous features of existing approaches to govern and assess emerging technologies. Our analysis suggests that its greatest potential may be in its ability to unify and provide political momentum to a wide range of long-articulated ethical and policy issues. At the same time, RRI's dynamism and resulting complexity may represent its greatest challenge. Further clarification on what RRI has to offer in practice-beyond what has been offered to date-is still needed, as well as more explicit engagement with research and institutional cultures of responsibility. Such work may help to realise the high political expectations that are attached to nascent RRI.

show abstract

Section: An Overview Of Definitionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: An Overview Of Definitionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Mobilising Concept? Unpacking Academic Representations of Responsible Research and Innovation

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Smear microscopy is a classical and fast diagnostic method, which detects acid-fast bacilli using Ziehl-Neelsen stain, but its sensitivity is low 4,5. Culturing of mycobacteria is the gold standard for diagnosing TB; however, it takes three to six weeks to form colonies 6,7,8.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of a Quantitative Sandwich Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay for Detecting the MPT64 Antigen ofMycobacterium tuberculosis

Cho²,

Cho³

et al. 2014

Yonsei Med J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeTuberculosis (TB) is a major infectious disease and is responsible for two million deaths annually. For the identification and quantitation of Mycobacterium tuberculosis (M. tuberculosis), a causative agent of TB, a sandwich enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) against the MPT64 protein of M. tuberculosis, an antigen marker of the M. tuberculosis complex, was developed.Materials and MethodsThe MPT64 protein was expressed, and anti-MPT64 monoclonal antibodies were prepared. A sandwich ELISA was established using recombinant MPT64 protein and anti-MPT64 monoclonal antibodies. The sandwich MPT64 ELISA was evaluated using reference and clinical mycobacterial strains.ResultsThe sandwich MPT64 ELISA detected MPT64 protein from 2.1 ng/mL to 250 ng/mL (equivalent to 1.7×104 CFU/mL and 2.0×106 CFU/mL). All 389 clinical M. tuberculosis isolates tested positive in the sandwich MPT64 ELISA (sensitivity, 100%), and the assay showed no cross reactivity to any tested nontuberculous mycobacterial strain (specificity, 100%).ConclusionThe sandwich MPT64 ELISA is a highly sensitive and quantitative test for MPT64 protein, which can identify M. tuberculosis.

show abstract

Verification and Validation of Tests Used in the Clinical Microbiology Laboratory

Tibbetts

2015

Clinical Microbiology Newsletter

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evaluation of new technology in the clinical microbiology laboratory

Cited by 5 publications

References 10 publications

A Mobilising Concept? Unpacking Academic Representations of Responsible Research and Innovation

A Mobilising Concept? Unpacking Academic Representations of Responsible Research and Innovation

Development of a Quantitative Sandwich Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay for Detecting the MPT64 Antigen ofMycobacterium tuberculosis

Verification and Validation of Tests Used in the Clinical Microbiology Laboratory

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About