Judging Quality and Coordination in Biomarker Diagnostic Development
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
Abstract
What makes a high-quality biomarker experiment The success of personalised medicine hinges on the answer to this question. In this paper, I argue that judgment about the quality of biomarker experiments is mediated by the problem of theoretical underdetermination. That is, the network of biological and pathophysiological theories motivating a biomarker experiment is sufficiently complicated that it often frustrates valid interpretation of the experimental results. Drawing on a case-study in biomarker diagnostic development from neurooncology, I argue that this problem of underdetermination can be overcome with greater coordination across the biomarker research trajectory. I then sketch an account for how coordination across a research trajectory can be evaluated. I ultimate conclude that what makes a high-quality biomarker experiment must be judged by the epistemic contribution it makes to this coordinated research effort.
How to Cite
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
biomarkers, personalised medicine, underdetermination, neurooncology
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons License.