Nurturing Societal Values in and Through Health Innovations; Comment on “What Health System Challenges Should Responsible Innovation in Health Address?”

Document Type : Commentary


1 National Health Care Institute, Diemen, The Netherlands

2 Amsterdam University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands


Aligning innovation processes in healthcare with health system demands is a societal objective, not always achieved. In line with earlier contributions, Lehoux et al outline priorities for research, public communication, and policy action to achieve this objective. We endorse setting these priorities, while also highlighting a ‘commitment gap’ in collectively addressing system-level challenges. To acknowledge that stakeholders engaged in dialogue with one another are addressing the commitment gap is not a small step but a giant leap towards realising a socially responsible innovation agenda. Translating system-level demand signals into innovation opportunities is, therefore, the task-cum-art of all stakeholders, one that often prompts them to innovate how they deal with innovations.


Main Subjects

  1. Cutler DM, McClellan M. Is technological change in medicine worth it? Health Aff (Millwood). 2001;20(5):11-29.
  2. Lehoux P. The problem of health technology: policy implications for modern health care systems. New York: Routledge; 2006.
  3. Abrishami P. Public Value of Medical Innovations: A quest for all and for all seasons [dissertation]. Maastricht: Maastricht University; 2018.
  4. Gelijns AC, Brown LD, Magnell C, Ronchi E, Moskowitz AJ. Evidence, politics, and technological change. Health Aff (Millwood). 2005;24(1):29-40. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.24.1.29
  5. Karaca-Mandic P, Town RJ, Wilcock A. The effect of physician and hospital market structure on medical technology diffusion. Health Serv Res. 2017;52(2):579-598. doi:10.1111/1475-6773.12506
  6. Lehoux P, Roncarolo F, Silva HP, Boivin A, Denis JL, Hebert R. What health system challenges should responsible innovation in health address? Insights from an international scoping review. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2018;8(2):63-75. doi:10.15171/ijhpm.2018.110
  7. Ehrenhard M, Wijnhoven F, van den Broek T, Zinck Stagno M. Unlocking how start-ups create business value with mobile applications: development of an app-enabled business innovation cycle. Technol Forecast Soc Change. 2017;115:26-36. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2016.09.011
  8. Epstein D, ProPublica. When evidence says no, but doctors say yes. The Atlantic. February 22, 2017.
  9. Hulstaert F, Neyt M, Vinck I, et al. Pre-market clinical evaluations of innovative high-risk medical devices in Europe. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2012;28(3):278-284. doi:10.1017/s0266462312000335
  10. Garrow JS. What to do about CAM: How much of orthodox medicine is evidence based? BMJ. 2007;335(7627):951. doi:10.1136/bmj.39388.393970.1F
  11. Hofmann BM. Too much technology. BMJ. 2015;350:h705. doi:10.1136/bmj.h705
  12. Lucivero F. Ethical Assessments of Emerging Technologies: Appraising the moral plausibility of technological visions. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2016.
  13. Koopmanschap M, de Meijer C, Polder J. Determinants of health care expenditure in an aging society. Netspar Panel Paper 22. Tilburg: Tilburg University; 2010.
  14. RIVM. Public Health Foresight Study. Dutch National Institute of Health and the Environment (RIVM); 2018.  
  15. Bodenheimer T. High and rising health care costs. Part 2: technologic innovation. Ann Intern Med. 2005;142(11):932-937. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-142-11-200506070-00012
  16. Rye CB, Kimberly JR. The adoption of innovations by provider organizations in health care. Med Care Res Rev. 2007;64(3):235-278. doi:10.1177/1077558707299865
  17. Mattke S, Liu H, Orr P. Medical device innovation in the era of the affordable care act: the end of sexy. Rand Health Q. 2016;6(1):1-12.
  18. Schulman KA, Richman BD. Toward an effective innovation agenda. N Engl J Med. 2019;380(10):900-901. doi:10.1056/NEJMp1812460
  19. Velasco Garrido M, Gerhardus A, Rottingen JA, Busse R. Developing health technology assessment to address health care system needs. Health Policy. 2010;94(3):196-202. doi:10.1016/j.healthpol.2009.10.002
  20. Henshall C, Schuller T. Health technology assessment, value-based decision making, and innovation. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2013;29(4):353-359. doi:10.1017/s0266462313000378
  21. Demers-Payette O, Lehoux P, Daudelin G. Responsible research and innovation: a productive model for the future of medical innovation. J Responsible Innov. 2016;3(3):188-208. doi:10.1080/23299460.2016.1256659
  22. Abelson J, Blacksher EA, Li KK, Boesveld SE, Goold SD. Public deliberation in health policy and bioethics: mapping an emerging, interdisciplinary field. Journal of Public Deliberation. 2013;9(1):5.
  23. Crawshaw P. Public health policy and the behavioural turn: The case of social marketing. Crit Soc Policy. 2013;33(4):616-637. doi:10.1177/0261018313483489
Volume 8, Issue 10
October 2019
Pages 613-615
  • Receive Date: 10 April 2019
  • Revise Date: 28 June 2019
  • Accept Date: 30 June 2019
  • First Publish Date: 01 October 2019