{"paper_id":"2444fd91-fd44-4b7b-ab89-4bdb573548b6","body_text":"Abbott, A. (1988). The System of Professions: An Essay on the Division of Expert Labor. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.\nBatt, R. (2011). A history of endometriosis. London: Springer.\nBeaulieu, A. (2001). Voxels in the brain: Neuroscience, Informatics and Changing Notions of Objectivity. Social Studies of Science. 31(5), 635-680.\nBeaulieu, A. (2002). Images Are Not the (Only) Truth: Brain Mapping, Visual Knowledge, and Iconoclasm. Science, Technology, & Human Values. 27(1), 53-86.\nBessy, C., Chateauraynaud, F. (1993). Les ressorts de l’expertise. In Conein, B., Dodier, N., Thévenot, L. (dir.). Les objets dans l’action. De la maison au laboratoire. Paris : Les Editions de l’EHESS.\nBessy, C., Chateauraynaud, F. (2014 [1995]). Experts et faussaires. Pour une sociologie de la perception. Paris : Pétra.\nBlume, S. S. (1992). Insight and Industry: On the Dynamics of' Technological Change in Medicine. Cambridge: MIT Press.\nBoullier, D. (1995). Du patient à l’image radiologique : une sociologie des transformations. Techniques et culture, 25/26, 19-34.\nBurri, R. V. (2008). Doing distinctions: Boundary work and symbolic capital in radiology. Social Studies of Science. 38(1), 35-62.\nBurri, R. V., Dumit, J. (2008). Social Studies of Scientific Imaging and Visualization. In Hackett, E.J., Amsterdamska, O., Lynch, M., Wajcman, J. (dir.). The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies. Cambridge: MIT Press.\nCartwright, L. (1995). Screening the Body: Tracing Medicine's Visual Culture. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.\nChateauraynaud F. (1997). Vigilance et transformation. Présence corporelle et responsabilité dans la conduite des dispositifs techniques. Réseaux, 85(15), 101-127.\nCohn, S. (2004). Increasing resolution, intensifying ambiguity: An ethnographic account of seeing life in brain scans. Economy and Society. 33(1), 52-76.\nDaston, L., Galison P. (2007). Objectivity. New York: Zone Books.\nDidi-Huberman. 2014 [1982]. Invention de l’hystérie. Charcot et l’Iconographie photographique de la Salpêtrière. Paris : Editions Macula.\nDodier, N. (1993). Les arènes des habiletés techniques. In Conein, B., Dodier, N., Thévenot, L. (dir.). Les objets dans l’action. De la maison au laboratoire. Paris : Les Editions de l’EHESS.\nDodier, N. (2003). Leçons politiques de l’épidémie du sida. Paris : Editions de l’EHESS.\nDodier, N., Barbot, J. (2008). Autonomy and Objectivity as Political Operators in the Medical World: Twenty Years of Public Controversy about AIDS Treatments in France. Science in Context. 21(3), 403-434.\nDodier, N., Barbot, J. (2016). La force des dispositifs. Annales « Histoire, Sciences Sociales ». 71(2), 421-450.\nDuden, B. (1991). The Woman Beneath the Skin: A Doctor's Patients in Eighteenth-Century Germany. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.\nDumit, J. (1999). Objective Brains, Prejudicial Images. Science in Context. 12(1), 173-201.\nEstival, C. (2012). Incidences de l’imagerie médicale sur la pudeur dans la relation patients-soignants. Histoire, médecine et santé. 1, 77-91.\nFoucault, M. (1963). Naissance de la clinique. Paris : Presses Universitaires de France.\nGieryn, T. (1983). Boundary-work and the demarcation of science from non-science: Strains and interests in professional ideologies of scientists. American Sociological Review. 48(6), 781-795.\nGolan, T. (2004). The Emergence of the Silent Witness: The Legal and Medical Reception of X-rays in the USA. Social Studies of Science. 34(4), 469-499.\nGoodwin, C. (1994). Professional Vision. American Anthropologist. 96(3), 606-633.\nHaute Autorité de Santé. (2017). Prise en charge de l’endométriose. Consulté sur https://www.has-sante.fr/upload/docs/application/pdf/2018-01/prise_en_charge_de_lendometriose_-_recommandations.pdf\nJoyce, K. (2005). Appealing Images: Magnetic Resonance Imaging and the Production of Authoritative Knowledge. Social Studies of Science. 35(3), 437-462.\nJoyce, K. (2006). From Numbers to Pictures: The Development of Magnetic Resonance Imaging and the Visual Turn in Medicine. Science as Culture. 15(1), 1-22.\nKevles, B. H. (1997). Naked to The Bone: Medical Imaging in The Twentieth Century. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.\nKoch, E. B. (1993). In the Image of Science? Negotiating the Development of Diagnostic Ultrasound in the Cultures of Surgery and Radiology. Technology and Culture. 34(4), 858-893.\nKoechlin, A. (en cours). Les mobilisations professionnelles et politiques autour d’une spécialité de la santé des femmes, la gynécologie médicale (1931-2020). Thèse de doctorat en sociologie, Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, Paris.\nLatour, B. (1985). Les vues de l’esprit. Culture Technique. 14, 5-29.\nLaws, S. (1990). Issues of blood: The politics of menstruation. Hampshire: Macmillan.\nLynch, M. (1985). Discipline and the Material Form of Images: An Analysis of Scientific Visibility. Social Studies of Science. 15(1), 37-66.\nLynch, M., Woolgar, S. (dir.) (1990 [1988]). Representation in Scientific Practice. Cambridge: MIT Press.\nMitchell, L. (2001). Baby’s First Picture. Toronto: University Toronto Press.\nNezhat, C., Nezhat, F., Nezhat, C. (2012). Endometriosis: ancient disease, ancient treatments. Fertility and Sterility. 98(6S), S1-S62.\nNorman, D. A. (1993). Les artefacts cognitifs. In Conein, B., Dodier, N., Thévenot, L. (dir.). Les objets dans l’action. De la maison au laboratoire. Paris : Les Editions de l’EHESS.\nPasveer, B. (1989). Knowledge of shadows: the introduction of X-ray images in medicine. Sociology of Health and Illness. 11(4), 360-383.\nPasveer, B. (2006). Representing or Mediating. A History and Philosophy of x-ray Images in Medicine. In Pauwels, L. (dir.). Visual cultures of science: rethinking representational practices in knowledge building and science communication. Hanover, London: University Press of New England.\nRapp, R. (1998). Real-Time Fetus: The Role of the Sonogram in the Age of Monitored Reproduction. In Downey, G. L., Dumit J. (dir.). Cyborgs and Citadels: Anthropological Interventions in Emerging Sciences and Technologies. Santa Fe: School of American Research Press.\nSandell, K. (2010). Learning to produce, see and say the (ab)normal: Professional vision in ultrasound scanning during pregnancy. In Johnson, E., Berner, B. (dir.). Technology and Medical Practice: Blood, Guts and Machines. Farnham: Ashgate.\nSchnegg, C., Rey, S. (2017). Quand les morts passent un scanner. Anthropologie & Santé, 15.\nSchubert, C. (2011). Making sure. A comparative micro-analysis of diagnostic instruments in medical practice. Social Science and Medicine. 73, 851-857.\nSeear, K. (2009). The etiquette of endometriosis: Stigmatisation, menstrual concealment and the diagnostic delay. Social Science and Medicine. 69(8), 1220-1227.\nShafrir A. L. et al. (2018). Risk for and consequences of endometriosis: A critical epidemiologic review. Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology.\nSouffron, V. (2015). De l’autopsie à la virtopsie : Voir et ne pas y toucher. Communications. 97(2), 57-71.\nYoung, A (1995). The Harmony of Illusions: Inventing Post–Traumatic Stress Disorder. Princeton: Princeton University Press.\nYoxen, E. (1989 [1987]). Seeing with sound: a study of the development of medical images. In Bijker, W., Hughes, T., Pinch, T. (dir.). The Social construction of technological systems: new directions in the sociology and history of technology. Cambridge: MIT Press.","source_license":"CC0","license_restricted":false}