The dark side of hope and trust: Constructed expectations and the value-for-money regulation of new medicines

References

• Abraham, J. (1995). Science, politics and the pharmaceutical industry: Controversy and bias in drug regulation. London: UCL Press/Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Abraham, J. (2008). Sociology of pharmaceuticals development and regulation: A realist empirical research programme. Sociology of Health and Illness, 30(6), 869–885.
   Google Scholar
• Abraham, J. (2009). The pharmaceutical industry, the state and the NHS. In J. Gabe & M. Calnan (Eds.), The new sociology of the health service (pp. 99–120). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Abraham, J., & Lewis, G. (2000). Regulating medicines in Europe: Competition, expertise and public health. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Abraham, J., & Lewis, G. (2002). Citizenship, medical expertise and the capitalist regulatory state. Sociology, 36(1), 67–88.
   Google Scholar
• Alaszewski, A. (2002). The impact of the Bristol Royal Infirmary disaster and inquiry on public services in the UK. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 16(4), 371–378.
   Google Scholar
• Ball, T., & Dagger, R. (1991). Ideals and ideologies: A reader. New York: Harper Collins.
   Google Scholar
• Black, J. (2008). Constructing and contesting legitimacy and accountability in polycentric regulatory regimes. Regulation & Governance, 2, 137–164.
   Google Scholar
• Blume, S. (2010). The artificial ear: Cochlear implants and the culture of deafness. Piscataway, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Britten, N. (2008). Medicines and society: Patients, professionals and the dominance of pharmaceuticals. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave-Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, N. (2003). Hope against hype – Accountability in biopasts, presents and futures. Science Studies, 26(2), 3–21.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, N., & Webster, A. (2004). New medical technologies and society: Reordering life. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, P. (2009). The phenomenology of trust: A Schutzian analysis of the social construction of knowledge by gynae-oncology patients. Health, Risk and Society, 11(5), 391–407.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, P., & Calnan, M. (2010). Political accountability of explicit rationing: Legitimacy problems faced by NICE. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy, 15(2), 65–66.
   Google Scholar
• Calman, K., & Hine, D. (1995). A policy framework for commissioning cancer services: A report by the Expert Advisory Group on Cancer to the Chief Medical Officers of England and Wales. London: Department of Health.
   Google Scholar
• Calnan, M., & Rowe, R. (2008). Trust matters in healthcare. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Crinson, I. (2004). The politics of regulation within the ‘modernized’ NHS: The case of beta interferon and the ‘cost-effective’ treatment of multiple sclerosis. Critical Social Policy, 24(1), 30–49.
   Google Scholar
• Department of Health. (1997). The new NHS, modern, dependable. London: HMSO.
   Google Scholar
• Department of Health. (1998). A first class service – Quality in the new NHS. London: DoH.
   Google Scholar
• Department of Health. (2010). Equity and excellence: Liberating the NHS. London: TSO.
   Google Scholar
• Douglas, M. (1992). Risk and blame: Essays in cultural theory. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Dyer, C. (2007). NICE’s decision on dementia drugs was ‘irrational’, court is told. BMJ, 334, 1337.
   Google Scholar
• Gilson, L. (2006). Trust relations in health care: Theoretical perspectives and research needs. Journal of Health Organization and Management, 20(5), 359–375.
   Google Scholar
• Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the prison notebooks of Antonio Gramsci. London: Lawrence Wishart.
   Google Scholar
• Habermas, J. (1976). Legitimation crisis. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Habermas, J. (1984). Theory of communicative action. Reason and the rationalisation of society (Vol. 1). Boston, MA: Beacon.
   Google Scholar
• Hall, S. (1983). The problem of ideology – Marxism without guarantees. In B. Matthews (Ed.), Marx: 100 years on. London: Lawrence and Wishart.
   Google Scholar
• Ham, C., & Alberti, K. (2002). The medical profession, the public and the government. BMJ, 324, 838–842.
   Google Scholar
• Hedgecoe, A. (2004). The politics of personalised medicine: Pharmacogenetics in the clinic. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hortobagyi, G. (2005). Trastuzumab in the treatment of breast cancer. New England Journal of Medicine, 353, 1734–1736.
   Google Scholar
• Kennedy, I. (2009). Appraising the value of innovation and other benefits. London: NICE.
   Google Scholar
• Luhmann, N. (1979). Trust and power. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Meyer, S., & Ward, P. (2009). Reworking the sociology of trust: Making a semantic distinction between trust and dependence. In S. Lockie, D. Bissell, A. Grieg, M. Hynes, D. Marsh, L. Saha, et al. (Eds.), The future of sociology – Conference proceedings (pp. 1–16). Canberra, ACT: TASA.
   Google Scholar
• Möllering, G. (2006). Trust: Reason, routine, reflexivity. Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• Moran, M. (2003). The British regulatory state: High modernism and hyper innovation. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• NICE. (2006). Final appraisal determination: Donepezil, galantamine, rivastigmine (review) and memantine for the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease. London: NICE.
   Google Scholar
• NICE. (2009a). About technology appraisals. Accessed October 30, 2009, from http://www.nice.org.uk/aboutnice/whatwedo/abouttechnologyap-praisals/about_technology_appraisals.jsp
   Google Scholar
• NICE. (2009b). Report of threshold workshop. London: NICE.
   Google Scholar
• Outhwaite, W. (2009). Habermas: A critical introduction. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Power, M. (1997). The audit society: Rituals of verification. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Power, M. (2005). The risk management of everything. London: Demos.
   Google Scholar
• Rorty, R. (2002). Solidarity or objectivity? In K. Brad Wray (Ed.), Knowledge and inquiry: Readings in epistemology (pp. 422–437). Peterborough, ON: Broadview Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rothstein, H. (2006). The institutional origins of risk: A new agenda for risk research. Health, Risk and Society, 8(3), 215–221.
   Google Scholar
• Seale, C. (2001). Sporting cancer: Struggle language in news reports with cancer. Sociology of Health and Illness, 23(3), 308–329.
   Google Scholar
• Simpson, C. (2004). When hope makes us vulnerable: A discussion of patient provider interactions in the context of hope. Bioethics, 18(5), 428–447.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, R. (2005). Medical journals are an extension of the marketing arm of pharmaceutical companies. PLoS Medicine, 2(5), e138.
   Google Scholar
• Sontag, S. (2002). Illness as metaphor and AIDS and its metaphors. London: Penguin.
   Google Scholar
• Of NICE and men. (2009, July 7). Wall Street Journal, A14.
   Google Scholar
• Weber, M. (1968). Economy and society (Vol. 1). New York: Bedminster.
   Google Scholar
• Wilkinson, I. (2005). Suffering: A sociological introduction. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
   Google Scholar
• Wilkinson, I. (2010). Risk, vulnerability and everyday life. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Williams, S., Gabe, J., & Davis, P. (2008). The sociology of pharmaceuticals: Progress and prospects. Sociology of Health and Illness, 30(6), 813–824.
   Google Scholar
• Zigon, J. (2006). An ethics of hope: Working on the self in contemporary Moscow. Anthropology of East Europe Review, 24(2), 71–80.
   Google Scholar
• Zinn, J. (2008). Heading into the unknown: Everyday strategies for managing risk and uncertainty. Health, Risk and Society, 10(5), 439–450.
   Google Scholar
• Zizek, S. (2006). Interview in: The children of men. Los Angeles, CA: Universal Pictures.
   Google Scholar