Understanding the integration of artificial intelligence in healthcare organisations and systems through the NASSS framework: a qualitative study in a leading Canadian academic centre.

BACKGROUND: Artificial intelligence (AI) technologies are expected to "revolutionise" healthcare. However, despite their promises, their integration within healthcare organisations and systems remains limited. The objective of this study is to explore and understand the systemic challenges and implications of their integration in a leading Canadian academic hospital. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 29 stakeholders concerned by the integration of a large set of AI technologies within the organisation (e.g., managers, clinicians, researchers, patients, technology providers). Data were collected and analysed using the Non-Adoption, Abandonment, Scale-up, Spread, Sustainability (NASSS) framework. RESULTS: Among enabling factors and conditions, our findings highlight: a supportive organisational culture and leadership leading to a coherent organisational innovation narrative; mutual trust and transparent communication between senior management and frontline teams; the presence of champions, translators, and boundary spanners for AI able to build bridges and trust; and the capacity to attract technical and clinical talents and expertise. Constraints and barriers include: contrasting definitions of the value of AI technologies and ways to measure such value; lack of real-life and context-based evidence; varying patients' digital and health literacy capacities; misalignments between organisational dynamics, clinical and administrative processes, infrastructures, and AI technologies; lack of funding mechanisms covering the implementation, adaptation, and expertise required; challenges arising from practice change, new expertise development, and professional identities; lack of official professional, reimbursement, and insurance guidelines; lack of pre- and post-market approval legal and governance frameworks; diversity of the business and financing models for AI technologies; and misalignments between investors' priorities and the needs and expectations of healthcare organisations and systems. CONCLUSION: Thanks to the multidimensional NASSS framework, this study provides original insights and a detailed learning base for analysing AI technologies in healthcare from a thorough socio-technical perspective. Our findings highlight the importance of considering the complexity characterising healthcare organisations and systems in current efforts to introduce AI technologies within clinical routines. This study adds to the existing literature and can inform decision-making towards a judicious, responsible, and sustainable integration of these technologies in healthcare organisations and systems.

A Comprehensive, Valid, and Reliable Tool to Assess the Degree of Responsibility of Digital Health Solutions That Operate With or Without Artificial Intelligence: 3-Phase Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: Clinicians' scope of responsibilities is being steadily transformed by digital health solutions that operate with or without artificial intelligence (DAI solutions). Most tools developed to foster ethical practices lack rigor and do not concurrently capture the health, social, economic, and environmental issues that such solutions raise. OBJECTIVE: To support clinical leadership in this field, we aimed to develop a comprehensive, valid, and reliable tool that measures the responsibility of DAI solutions by adapting the multidimensional and already validated Responsible Innovation in Health Tool. METHODS: We conducted a 3-phase mixed methods study. Relying on a scoping review of available tools, phase 1 (concept mapping) led to a preliminary version of the Responsible DAI solutions Assessment Tool. In phase 2, an international 2-round e-Delphi expert panel rated on a 5-level scale the importance, clarity, and appropriateness of the tool's components. In phase 3, a total of 2 raters independently applied the revised tool to a sample of DAI solutions (n=25), interrater reliability was measured, and final minor changes were made to the tool. RESULTS: The mapping process identified a comprehensive set of responsibility premises, screening criteria, and assessment attributes specific to DAI solutions. e-Delphi experts critically assessed these new components and provided comments to increase content validity (n=293), and after round 2, consensus was reached on 85% (22/26) of the items surveyed. Interrater agreement was substantial for a subcriterion and almost perfect for all other criteria and assessment attributes. CONCLUSIONS: The Responsible DAI solutions Assessment Tool offers a comprehensive, valid, and reliable means of assessing the degree of responsibility of DAI solutions in health. As regulation remains limited, this forward-looking tool has the potential to change practice toward more equitable as well as economically and environmentally sustainable digital health care.

An urgent call for the environmental sustainability of health systems: A 'sextuple aim' to care for patients, costs, providers, population equity and the planet.

Health systems have a duty to protect the health and well-being of individuals and populations. Yet, healthcare contributes about 4.6% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Health systems need to question and improve established practices, assume strong environmental leadership, and aim for ambitious, sometimes radical, actions in favour of the climate. In this paper, we interrogate the suitability and feasibility of integrating the aim of 'environmental sustainability' to form the 'Sextuple Aim.' Environmental sustainability may be in tension with, but also a potential lever to meet the other cardinal aims: (1) quality and experience of patient care; (2) population health; (3) quality of work and satisfaction of healthcare providers; (4) equity and inclusion; and (5) cost reduction. We propose policy and practical avenues to help move towards the Sextuple Aim.

Why is repositioning public health innovation towards a social paradigm necessary? A reflection on the field of public health through the examples of Ebola and Covid-19.

Health innovations are generally oriented on a techno-economic vision. In this perspective, technologies are seen as an end in themselves, and there is no arrangement between the technical and the social values of innovation. This vision prevails in sanitary crises, in which management is carried out based on the search for punctual, reactive, and technical solutions to remedy a specific problem without a systemic/holistic, sustainable, or proactive approach. This paper attempts to contribute to the literature on the epistemological orientation of innovations in the field of public health. Taking the Covid-19 and Ebola crises as examples, the primary objective is to show how innovation in health is oriented towards a techno-economic paradigm. Second, we propose a repositioning of public health innovation towards a social paradigm that will put more emphasis on the interaction between social and health dimensions in the perspective of social change. We will conclude by highlighting the roles that public health could play in allowing innovations to have more social value, especially during sanitary crises.

Artificial intelligence in health care: laying the Foundation for Responsible, sustainable, and inclusive innovation in low- and middle-income countries.

The World Health Organization and other institutions are considering Artificial Intelligence (AI) as a technology that can potentially address some health system gaps, especially the reduction of global health inequalities in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). However, because most AI-based health applications are developed and implemented in high-income countries, their use in LMICs contexts is recent and there is a lack of robust local evaluations to guide decision-making in low-resource settings. After discussing the potential benefits as well as the risks and challenges raised by AI-based health care, we propose five building blocks to guide the development and implementation of more responsible, sustainable, and inclusive AI health care technologies in LMICs.

Improving delivery of care in rural emergency departments: a qualitative pilot study mobilizing health professionals, decision-makers and citizens in Baie-Saint-Paul and the Magdalen Islands, Québec, Canada.

BACKGROUND: Emergency departments (EDs) in rural and remote areas face challenges in delivering accessible, high quality and efficient services. The objective of this pilot study was to test the feasibility and relevance of the selected approach and to explore challenges and solutions to improve delivery of care in selected EDs. METHODS: We conducted an exploratory multiple case study in two rural EDs in Québec, Canada. A survey filled out by the head nurse for each ED provided a descriptive statistical portrait. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with ED health professionals, decision-makers and citizens (n = 68) and analyzed inductively and thematically. RESULTS: The two EDs differed with regards to number of annual visits, inter-facility transfers and wait time. Stakeholders stressed the influence of context on ED challenges and solutions, related to: 1) governance and management (e.g. lack of representation, poor efficiency, ill-adapted standards); 2) health services organization (e.g. limited access to primary healthcare and long-term care, challenges with transfers); 3) resources (e.g. lack of infrastructure, limited access to specialists, difficult staff recruitment/retention); 4) and professional practice (e.g. isolation, large scope, maintaining competencies with low case volumes, need for continuing education, teamwork and protocols). There was a general agreement between stakeholder groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show the feasibility and relevance of mobilizing stakeholders to identify context-specific challenges and solutions. It confirms the importance of undertaking a larger study to improve the delivery of care in rural EDs.

Artificial Intelligence and Health Technology Assessment: Anticipating a New Level of Complexity.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is seen as a strategic lever to improve access, quality, and efficiency of care and services and to build learning and value-based health systems. Many studies have examined the technical performance of AI within an experimental context. These studies provide limited insights into the issues that its use in a real-world context of care and services raises. To help decision makers address these issues in a systemic and holistic manner, this viewpoint paper relies on the health technology assessment core model to contrast the expectations of the health sector toward the use of AI with the risks that should be mitigated for its responsible deployment. The analysis adopts the perspective of payers (ie, health system organizations and agencies) because of their central role in regulating, financing, and reimbursing novel technologies. This paper suggests that AI-based systems should be seen as a health system transformation lever, rather than a discrete set of technological devices. Their use could bring significant changes and impacts at several levels: technological, clinical, human and cognitive (patient and clinician), professional and organizational, economic, legal, and ethical. The assessment of AI's value proposition should thus go beyond technical performance and cost logic by performing a holistic analysis of its value in a real-world context of care and services. To guide AI development, generate knowledge, and draw lessons that can be translated into action, the right political, regulatory, organizational, clinical, and technological conditions for innovation should be created as a first step.

Rethinking the electronic health record through the quadruple aim: time to align its value with the health system.

Electronic health records (EHRs) are considered as a powerful lever for enabling value-based health systems. However, many challenges to their use persist and some of their unintended negative impacts are increasingly well documented, including the deterioration of work conditions and quality, and increased dissatisfaction of health care providers. The "quadruple aim" consists of improving population health as well as patient and provider experience while reducing costs. Based on this approach, improving the quality of work and well-being of health care providers could help rethinking the implementation of EHRs and also other information technology-based tools and systems, while creating more value for patients, organizations and health systems.

Cadre stratégique pour soutenir l'évaluation des projets complexes et innovants en santé numérique.

Digital technologies play a central role in strategies to improve access, quality and efficiency of health care and services. However, many digital health projects have failed to become sustainable and spread across health organizations and systems. This situation is partly due to the fact that these projects are often developed and evaluated by reducing the issues linked mainly to the technological dimension. Such tradition has paid little attention to the fact that technology is introduced into pluralistic and complex sociotechnical systems such as health organizations and systems. The aim of this article is to propose practical and theorical, non-prescriptive, elements of reflection that can serve as a basis for evaluating complex and innovative digital health projects. This reflection builds on the lessons learned from the application of a strategic framework for evaluating three major complex and innovative digital health projects in Quebec over the last 15 years.

[Strategic framework to Support the evaluation of complex and innovative digital health projects] / Cadre stratégique pour soutenir l'évaluation des projets complexes et innovants en santé numérique.

Digital technologies play a central role in strategies to improve access, quality and efficiency of health care and services. However, many digital health projects have failed to become sustainable and spread across health organizations and systems. This situation is partly due to the fact that these projects are often developed and evaluated by reducing the issues linked mainly to the technological dimension. Such tradition has paid little attention to the fact that technology is introduced into pluralistic and complex sociotechnical systems such as health organizations and systems. The aim of this article is to propose practical and theorical, non-prescriptive, elements of reflection that can serve as a basis for evaluating complex and innovative digital health projects. This reflection builds on the lessons learned from the application of a strategic framework for evaluating three major complex and innovative digital health projects in Quebec over the last 15 years.

[Organizational and systemic conditions of citizen-patient involvement in the development of telehealth in Quebec]. / Conditions organisationnelles et systémiques à l'implication des citoyens-patients dans le développement de la télésanté au Québec.

OBJECTIVES: Involving citizens-patients in decisions regarding telehealth services could allow a better match between the services offered and the needs and contexts of individuals and communities. This study aims to explore the organizational and systemic conditions that can influence citizen-patient involvement in the development of telehealth in Quebec. METHODS: A qualitative study based on semi-structured interviews with 29 key informants was conducted. A deductive-inductive thematic analysis was performed based on an integrative framework derived from diffusion of innovation theories. RESULTS: Citizen-patient involvement in the development of telehealth remains dependent on many organizational and systemic conditions. At the organizational level, it could affect the dynamics, process, cultures, rules and operations in organizations; hence the needs for adequate human and material resources as well as the availability of support for change. At the systemic level, the ideology, the sociopolitical context and the decisions in favor (or not) of a citizen appropriation of the decision-making are central. Concerns about scientific evidence, training, as well as the roles of professional federations, and citizen-patient groups have also emerged. Organizational and systemic levels are interdependent. CONCLUSION: The organizational and systemic contexts may explain part of the contrast between the discourse in favor of citizen-patient involvement in telehealth decision-making and the reality observed in Quebec. This study provides a basis for analyzing citizen-patient involvement in services development from the perspective of organizational and systemic changes.

[Reorientation of health services and health promotion: a review of the situation]. / La réorientation des services de santé et la promotion de la santé : une lecture de la situation.

The Ottawa Charter constitutes a major turning point in the world's vision of health, resources and the strategies to be implemented in order to respond to the populations expectations in this field. However, these expectations are no longer limited to the conventional biomedical concept of health, strongly care-oriented and focused on diseases. They currently integrate prevention of diseases and health promotion. Five main strategic actions have been identified to achieve these goals: 1) elaboration of public health policies; 2) creation of supportive environments; 3) strengthening of community actions; 4) development of individual skills; and 5) reorientation of health services. Almost 3 decades after the Ottawa Charter, what is the real orientation of health services in relation to health promotion? To answer this question, we will discuss the results of this approach, while analysing the multiple elements and factors that have contributed to these results, largely considered to have a mixed record in the literature.

Thematic analysis of tools for health innovators and organisation leaders to develop digital health solutions fit for climate change.

OBJECTIVES: While ethicists have largely underscored the risks raised by digital health solutions that operate with or without artificial intelligence (AI), limited research has addressed the need to also mitigate their environmental footprint and equip health innovators as well as organisation leaders to meet responsibility requirements that go beyond clinical safety, efficacy and ethics. Drawing on the Responsible Innovation in Health framework, this qualitative study asks: (1) what are the practice-oriented tools available for innovators to develop environmentally sustainable digital solutions and (2) how are organisation leaders supposed to support them in this endeavour? METHODS: Focusing on a subset of 34 tools identified through a comprehensive scoping review (health sciences, computer sciences, engineering and social sciences), our qualitative thematic analysis identifies and illustrates how two responsibility principles-environmental sustainability and organisational responsibility-are meant to be put in practice. RESULTS: Guidance to make environmentally sustainable digital solutions is found in 11 tools whereas organisational responsibility is described in 33 tools. The former tools focus on reducing energy and materials consumption as well as pollution and waste production. The latter tools highlight executive roles for data risk management, data ethics and AI ethics. Only four tools translate environmental sustainability issues into tangible organisational responsibilities. CONCLUSIONS: Recognising that key design and development decisions in the digital health industry are largely shaped by market considerations, this study indicates that significant work lies ahead for medical and organisation leaders to support the development of solutions fit for climate change.

Through the big top: An exploratory study of circus-based artistic knowledge translation in rural healthcare services, Québec, Canada.

BACKGROUND: The conventional methods and strategies used for knowledge translation (KT) in academic research often fall short in effectively reaching stakeholders, such as citizens, practitioners, and decision makers, especially concerning complex healthcare issues. In response, a growing number of scholars have been embracing arts-based knowledge translation (ABKT) to target a more diverse audience with varying backgrounds and expectations. Despite the increased interest, utilization, and literature on arts-based knowledge translation over the past three decades, no studies have directly compared traditional knowledge translation with arts-based knowledge translation methods. Thus, our study aimed to evaluate and compare the impact of an arts-based knowledge translation intervention-a circus show-with two traditional knowledge translation interventions (webinar and research report) in terms of awareness, accessibility, engagement, advocacy/policy influence, and enjoyment. METHODS: To conduct this exploratory convergent mixed method study, we randomly assigned 162 participants to one of the three interventions. All three knowledge translation methods were used to translate the same research project: "Rural Emergency 360: Mobilization of decision-makers, healthcare professionals, patients, and citizens to improve healthcare and services in Quebec's rural emergency departments (UR360)." RESULTS: The findings revealed that the circus show outperformed the webinar and research report in terms of accessibility and enjoyment, while being equally effective in raising awareness, increasing engagement, and influencing advocacy/policy. Each intervention strategy demonstrates its unique array of strengths and weaknesses, with the circus show catering to a diverse audience, while the webinar and research report target more informed participants. These outcomes underscore the innovative and inclusive attributes of Arts-Based Knowledge translation, showcasing its capacity to facilitate researchers' engagement with a wider array of stakeholders across diverse contexts. CONCLUSION: As a relevant first step and a complementary asset, arts-based knowledge translation holds immense potential in increasing awareness and mobilization around crucial health issues.

A conceptualisation of scale-up and sustainability of social innovations in global health: a narrative review and integrative framework for action.

BACKGROUND: The scale-up and sustainability of social innovations for health have received increased interest in global health research in recent years; however, these ambiguous concepts are poorly defined and insufficiently theorised and studied. Researchers, policymakers, and practitioners lack conceptual clarity and integrated frameworks for the scale-up and sustainability of global health innovations. Often, the frameworks developed are conceived in a linear and deterministic or consequentialist vision of the diffusion of innovations. This approach limits the consideration of complexity in scaling up and sustaining innovations. OBJECTIVE: By using a systems theory lens and conducting a narrative review, this manuscript aims to produce an evidence-based integrative conceptual framework for the scale-up and sustainability of global health innovations. METHOD: We conducted a hermeneutic narrative review to synthetise different definitions of scale-up and sustainability to model an integrative definition of these concepts for global health. We have summarised the literature on the determinants that influence the conditions for innovation success or failure while noting the interconnections between internal and external innovation environments. RESULTS: The internal innovation environment includes innovation characteristics (effectiveness and testability, monitoring and evaluation systems, simplification processes, resource requirements) and organisational characteristics (leadership and governance, organisational change, and organisational viability). The external innovation environment refers to receptive and transformative environments; the values, cultures, norms, and practices of individuals, communities, organisations, and systems; and other contextual characteristics relevant to innovation development. CONCLUSION: From these syntheses, we proposed an interconnected framework for action to better guide innovation researchers, practitioners, and policymakers in incorporating complexity and systemic interactions between internal and external innovation environments in global health.

Assessing healthcare capacity crisis preparedness: development of an evaluation tool by a Canadian health authority.

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic presented health systems across the globe with unparalleled socio-political, ethical, scientific, and economic challenges. Despite the necessity for a unified, innovative, and effective response, many jurisdictions were unprepared to such a profound health crisis. This study aims to outline the creation of an evaluative tool designed to measure and evaluate the Vitalité Health Network's (New Brunswick, Canada) ability to manage health crises. Methods: The methodology of this work was carried out in four stages: (1) construction of an evaluative framework; (2) validation of the framework; (3) construction of the evaluative tool for the Health Authority; and (4) evaluation of the capacity to manage a health crisis. Results: The resulting evaluative tool incorporated 8 dimensions, 74 strategies, and 109 observable elements. The dimensions included: (1) clinical care management; (2) infection prevention and control; (3) governance and leadership; (4) human and logistic resources; (5) communication and technologies; (6) health research; (7) ethics and values; and (8) training. A Canadian Health Authority implemented the tool to support its future preparedness. Conclusion: This study introduces a methodological strategy adopted by a Canadian health authority to evaluate its capacity in managing health crises. Notably, this study marks the first instance where a Canadian health authority has created a tool for emergency healthcare management, informed by literature in the field and their direct experience from handling the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

Integrating environmental considerations in digital health technology assessment and procurement: Stakeholders' perspectives.

Background: Digital health technologies (DHTs) are promoted as means to reduce the environmental impact of healthcare systems. However, a growing literature is shedding light on the highly polluting nature of the digital industry and how it exacerbates health inequalities. Thus, the environmental footprint of DHTs should be considered when assessing their overall value to healthcare systems. The objectives of this article are to: (1) explore stakeholders' perspectives on integrating the environmental impacts of DHTs in assessment and procurement practices; (2) identify the factors enabling or constraining the operationalisation of such a change; and (3) encourage a constructive dialogue on how environmental issues fit within healthcare systems' push for more DHTs. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 29 stakeholders involved in DHTs in a large Canadian academic healthcare centre. Data were collected and analysed through a mixed deductive-inductive process using a framework derived from diffusion of innovations theories. Results: The integration of the environmental impact of DHTs in assessment and procurement is contingent upon key micro-meso-macrosystemic factors that either enable or constrain changes in practices and processes. Innovation (micro) factors include stakeholders' recognition of the environmental issue and the extent to which it is feasible for them to address the environmental impact of DHTs. Organisational (meso) factors include the organisation's culture, leadership, policies, and practices, as well as the expertise and professional skillsets available. Finally, external (macro) factors include political and regulatory (e.g., national strategy, laws, standards, norms), economic (e.g., business models, public procurement), and professional and scientific factors (e.g., evidence, methodologies, clinical guidelines). Conclusion: Considering the environmental impact of DHTs depends on micro-meso-macrosystemic factors involving a variety of stakeholders and levels of governance, sometimes with divergent or even antagonistic objectives and expectations. It highlights the importance of better understanding the complexity inherent in the environmental shift in healthcare.

The 'wrong pocket' problem as a barrier to the integration of telehealth in health organisations and systems.

The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the deployment of telehealth services in many countries around the world. It also revealed many barriers and challenges to the use of digital health technologies in health organisations and systems that have persisted for decades. One of these barriers is what is known as the 'wrong pocket' problem - where an organisation or sector makes expenditures and investments to address a given problem, but the benefits (return on investment) are captured by another organisation or sector (the wrong pocket). This problem is the origin of many difficulties in public policies and programmes (e.g. education, environment, justice and public health), especially in terms of sustainability and scaling-up of technology and innovation. In this essay/perspective, we address the wrong pocket problem in the context of a major telehealth project in Canada. We show how the problem of sharing investments and expenses, as well as the redistribution of economies among the different stakeholders involved, may have threatened the sustainability and scaling-up of this project, even though it has demonstrated the clinical utility and contributed to improving the health of populations. In conclusion, the wrong pocket problem may be decisive in the reduced take-up, and potential failure, of certain telehealth programmes and policies. It is not enough for a telehealth service to be clinically relevant and 'efficient', it must also be mutually beneficial to the various stakeholders involved, particularly in terms of the equitable sharing of costs and benefits (return on investment) associated with the implementation of this new service model. Finally, the wrong pocket concept offers a helpful lens for studying the success, sustainability, and scale-up of digital transformations in health organisations and systems. This needs to be considered in future research and evaluations in the field.

Strategizing Research for Impact.

In its Strategic Plan 2021-2026, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research - Institute of Health Services and Policy Research (IHSPR) convincingly expresses its desire to expand capacity for applied health services and policy research (HSPR) and better mobilize research results for health system transformation geared toward the Quadruple Aim and health equity for all (CIHR IHSPR 2021). These strategic priorities echo views widely shared within the HSPR community, and we commend IHSPR for its leadership and vision. Recognizing the systemic challenges ahead of us, this commentary considers the HSPR community's capacity to achieve the promise of learning health systems, given the obstacles likely to hinder their rapid scale-up over the next five years. Next, we consider the spread of virtual care during the pandemic to illustrate the embedded and negotiated nature of innovation in health systems and the need for vigilance as to the social distribution of their benefits and costs. Finally, a critical review of the strategic plan provides insights into how research is governed in the HSPR field. Based on this analysis, it appears essential to reconsider health system transformation as social system transformation and strengthen interdisciplinary and comparative research. Looking forward, developing a science of science to better understand the conditions associated with high-impact research should be a cross-cutting priority for Canada's HSPR community.

Virtual Care and the Inverse Care Law: Implications for Policy, Practice, Research, Public and Patients.

Virtual care spread rapidly at the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. Restricting in-person contact contributed to reducing the spread of infection and saved lives. However, the benefits of virtual care were not evenly distributed within and across social groups, and existing inequalities became exacerbated for those unable to fully access to, or benefit from virtual services. This "perspective" paper discusses the extent to which challenges in virtual care access and use in the context of COVID-19 follow the Inverse Care Law. The latter stipulates that the availability and quality of health care is inversely proportionate to the level of population health needs. We highlight the inequalities affecting some disadvantaged populations' access to, and use of public and private virtual care, and contrast this with a utopian vision of technology as the "solution to everything". In public and universal health systems, the Inverse Care Law may manifests itself in access issues, capacity, and/or lack of perceived benefit to use digital technologies, as well as in data poverty. For commercial "Direct-To-Consumer" services, all of the above may be encouraged via a consumerist (i.e., profit-oriented) approach, limited and episodic services, or the use of low direct cost platforms. With virtual care rapidly growing, we set out ways forward for policy, practice, and research to ensure virtual care benefits for everyone, which include: (1) pay more attention to "capabilities" supporting access and use of virtual care; (2) consider digital technologies as a basic human right that should be automatically taken into account, not only in health policies, but also in social policies; (3) take more seriously the impact of the digital economy on equity, notably through a greater state involvement in co-constructing "public health value" through innovation; and (4) reconsider the dominant digital innovation research paradigm to better recognize the contexts, factors, and conditions that influence access to and use of virtual care by different groups.