Although technology adoption and remuneration are significant barriers to the development and implementation of innovative diagnostics, health imperialism may be just as important.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$209.00 per year
only $17.42 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
References
The Lewin Group. The Value of Diagnostics: Innovation, Adoption and Diffusion into Health Care. The Lewing Group. Washington, DC. July, 2005. http://www.advamed.org/publicdocs/thevalueofdiagnostics.pdf.
Haga, B. & Burke, W. Using pharmacogenetics to improve drug safety and efficacy. JAMA 2004; 291, 2869–2871.
Stoler, M. & Schiffman, M., for the Atypical Squamous Cells of Undetermined Significance–Low-grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion Triage Study Group. Interobserver reproducibility of cervical cytologic and histologic interpretations: realistic estimates from the ASCUS-LSIL Triage Study. JAMA 2001; 285, 1500–1505.
Billings P. Genetic nondiscrimination. Nature Genetics 2005; 37, 559–560.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Billings, P. Three barriers to innovative diagnostics. Nat Biotechnol 24, 917–918 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt0806-917
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt0806-917
This article is cited by
-
Manganese Metal–Organic Framework: Chemical Stability, Photoluminescence Studies, and Biosensing Application
Journal of Inorganic and Organometallic Polymers and Materials (2021)
