Third International Conference On System Science In Health Care

In the early stages of planning the Third International Conference in System Science in Health Care, the steering committee members, most of whom had participated in the first conference in Paris (1976) and the second in Montreal (1980), made some basic decisions about organization of subject matter. The earlier meetings had been very successful in bringing together specialists from the health professions and the traditional sciences. In addition to physicians and nurses, these were representatives of the disciplines of the behavioral sciences, system theory, economics, engineering, and the emergency fields of management science and informatics -all concerned with the development of health resources in a broad system context. The reported research and experience of the many disciplines represented had dealt with one or more of three concerns: 1) a major health problem, such as cardiovascular disease, or an important popUlation at risk, such as the elderly or children or workers; 2) some generic aspect of organization and decision making, including trial and evaluation ofinnovative health strategies; and 3) the methodology of research and analysis in system of health service. The challenge to the conference organizers lay in the eliciting and arranging of experiences in such a way that the health services could be seen as purposeful,living, evolving systems.

In the early stages of planning the Third International Conference in System Science in Health Care, the steering committee members, most of whom had participated in the first conference in Paris (1976) and the second in Montreal (1980), made some basic decisions about organization of subject matter. The earlier meetings had been very successful in bringing together specialists from the health professions and the traditional sciences. In addition to physicians and nurses, these were representatives of the disciplines of the behavioral sciences, system theory, economics, engineering, and the emergency fields of management science and informatics -all concerned with the development of health resources in a broad system context. The reported research and experience of the many disciplines represented had dealt with one or more of three concerns: 1) a major health problem, such as cardiovascular disease, or an important popUlation at risk, such as the elderly or children or workers; 2) some generic aspect of organization and decision making, including trial and evaluation ofinnovative health strategies; and 3) the methodology of research and analysis in system of health service. The challenge to the conference organizers lay in the eliciting and arranging of experiences in such a way that the health services could be seen as purposeful,living, evolving systems.

Since the historieal conference held in Alma Ata in 1978, it has been possible to observe a reorientation of the medical profession. More and more, issues of health enter the stage and curative medicine is not just loosing ground but some interest. 'How effective is health education?' and 'Whose task is primary pre vention?' are questions which stimulate great concern and public debate. It seems also to be the first time since the last decades of the 19th century that the social dimension of health receives adequate consideration. Thus the reeent publication of the so-called Black Report on Inequalities in Health (Penguin 1982) led to a heated discussion in Great Britain, certainly of relevance to many other countries. The 6 years since 1978 are much too short a time to proceed far towards 'Health for All', as the slogan of the World Health Organization puts it, but the concepts are spelled out, vaguely but convincing to many of us. It is the right time to discuss first experiences and to move from philosophy to empiri eal work. This work - as it relates to the process evolving since Alma Ata - is characterized by participation, cooperation and prevention: Participation, because 'disease' concerns only the individual patient, his or her family and immediate social environment, while 'health' concerns everyone and should involve everyone. It is a task of the whole of society rather than the domaine of a single profession or party.

First multi-year cumulation covers six years: 1965-70.

This book is the first to directly address the question of how to bridge what has been termed the "great divide" between the approaches of systems developers and those of social scientists to computer supported cooperative work--a question that has been vigorously debated in the systems development literature. Traditionally, developers have been trained in formal methods and oriented to engineering and formal theoretical problems; many social scientists in the CSCW field come from humanistic traditions in which results are reported in a narrative mode. In spite of their differences in style, the two groups have been cooperating more and more in the last decade, as the "people problems" associated with computing become increasingly evident to everyone. The authors have been encouraged to examine, rigorously and in depth, the theoretical basis of CSCW. With contributions from field leaders in the United Kingdom, France, Scandinavia, Mexico, and the United States, this volume offers an exciting overview of the cutting edge of research and theory. It constitutes a solid foundation for the rapidly coalescing field of social informatics. Divided into three parts, this volume covers social theory, design theory, and the sociotechnical system with respect to CSCW. The first set of chapters looks at ways of rethinking basic social categories with the development of distributed collaborative computing technology--concepts of the group, technology, information, user, and text. The next section concentrates more on the lessons that can be learned at the design stage given that one wants to build a CSCW system incorporating these insights--what kind of work does one need to do and how is understanding of design affected? The final part looks at the integration of social and technical in the operation of working sociotechnical systems. Collectively the contributors make the argument that the social and technical are irremediably linked in practice and so the "great divide" not only should be a thing of the past, it should never have existed in the first place.