This scoping review was written for policymakers. Focusing on tools developed since 2015 to support responsibility in digital solutions that operate with or without artificial intelligence (D/AI), its asks: 1) what kinds of practice-oriented tools are available?; 2) on what principles do they predominantly rely?; and 3) what are their limitations? Despite a lack of consensus, policymakers can consolidate their role in this dynamic field.

Lehoux, P., Rivard, L., de Oliveira, R. R., Mörch, C. M., & Alami, H. (2022). Tools to foster responsibility in digital solutions that operate with or without artificial intelligence: A scoping review for health and innovation policymakers. International Journal of Medical Informatics.

Written for innovators and entrepreneurs, this ‘how to’ book clarifies the steps leading to the design of responsible innovations in health and to an organization that creates more value for society. It is downloadable through our own website.

Lehoux, P., Rivard, L. et Silva, H.P. (2022). Responsible Innovation in Health. Concepts and tools for sustainable impact. Springer Nature.

In this article, we explore the perspectives of entrepreneurs producing innovation in health who have received support from incubators or accelerators. We examine how the benefits vary depending on when and how the responsible health entrepreneurs received this support.

In this paper, we describe the challenges faced by organizations implementing new business models to develop and disseminate responsible innovations. By documenting the entrepreneurial challenges of 16 Canadian and Brazilian organizations (for-profit and non-profit), we develop an empirical model that clarifies what it means to create economic, social and environmental value.

Guided by Tronto’s (1993) ethic of care framework and Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI), the authors of this qualitative study focus on the ways in which health innovation designers reason around care and responsibility and translate these notions into their work. The exploratory findings provide a novel empirical basis for scholars to conceptualize health innovation designers as ‘care-makers’ and to integrate designers within the care relationship alongside caregivers and care-receivers.

In the field of Responsible Research and Innovation (RIR), tools have been developed to enable entrepreneurs to integrate RIR principles into their practices. While these tools may include measurable self-assessment indicators, external assessment approaches have so far received little attention. This study addresses this gap by applying the Responsible Innovation in Health (RIH) Tool, which adopts an external assessment approach, to 16 health innovations from Canada and Brazil.

Lehoux, P., Silva, H. P., Oliveira, R.R., Rivard, L. (2020). The responsible innovation in health tool and the need to reconcile formative and summative ends in RRI tools for business, Journal of Responsible Innovation.

Seen as professional intermediaries, procurement offices affect innovation: they shape the valuation of goods and the markets through which they are exchanged. Yet procurement offices seem largely incidental to the innovation efforts of others. In this article, the authors argue that enhancing the capacities of procurement offices can support responsive innovation.

Miller, A. F., Lehoux, P. (2020). The innovation impacts of public procurement offices: The case of healthcare procurement, Research Policy.

The In Fieri team, in collaboration with OBVIA, developed a policy brief on AI and digital solutions. Using examples, it describes the four responsible innovation principles and clarifies pre-existing socioeconomic dynamics that condition the current development of these solutions as well as future trajectories. We offer guidance for public decision-makers and developers to help them shift towards a more responsible development of these innovations.

Lehoux, P., Alami, H., Mörch, C., Rivard, L., Oliveira, R.R., Silva, H.P. (2020). Can we innovate responsibly during a pandemic? Artificial intelligence, digital solutions and SARS-Cov-2.

Comment inviting scholars to further the discussion on how the value of health innovations should be appraised in view of today’s societal challenges.

Lehoux, P., Silva, H.P. (2020). Transforming Disciplinary Traditions; Comment on “Problems and Promises of Health Technologies: The Role of Early Health Economic Modeling”, International Journal of Health Policy and Management.

This article generate methodological insights into the way prospective public deliberative processes can stimulate the public’s moral imagination regarding what may (or may not) happen in the future and what should (or should not) happen in the future.

Lehoux, P., Miller, F.A., Williams-Jones, B. (2020). Anticipatory governance and moral imagination: Methodological insights from a scenario-based public deliberation study, Technological Forecasting and Social Change.

This essay aims to clarify why alternative food systems supported by a different Science, Technology and Innovation (STI) approach can contribute to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG).

Pozelli Sabio, R., Lehoux, P. (2019). How can alternative food systems contribute to the sustainable development goals?, Systèmes alimentaires/Food Systems.

This paper examines how two complementary perspectives —as a public representative or a health services user— entail different yet mutually challenging ways of appraising health innovations. Policymakers should foster the expression of both personal and collective perspectives.

Lehoux, P. & Proulx S. (2019) Deliberating as a public representative or as a potential user? Two complementary perspectives that should inform health innovation policy, Healthcare Policy.

This article analyzes how procurement organizations assess the value of medical technologies: how products are solic- ited and evaluated, who is buying, and how buying practices structure opportunities for suppliers.

Miller, F.A., Lehoux, P., Peacock, S., Rac, V.E., Neukomm, J., Barg, C., Bytautas, J., Krahn, M. (2019). How procurement judges the value of medical technologies: A review of healthcare tenders, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care. 

To identify the challenges that responsible innovation in health should seek to address, this papers presents the findings of a synthesis of 254 articles that examined the challenges of health systems in 99 countries.

Lehoux, P., Roncarolo, F., Silva, H.P., Boivin, A., Denis, J.-L., Hébert, R. (2019). What health system challenges should responsible innovation in health address? Insights from an international scoping review, International Journal of Health Policy and Management.

With the help of empirical examples, this paper explores the relationships Responsible Innovation in Health (RIH) may entertain with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG).

Lehoux, P., Pacifico H.P., Pozelli Sabio, R., Roncarolo, F. (2018). The Unexplored Contribution of Responsible Innovation in Health to Sustainable Development Goals, Sustainability.

Drawing on a prospective public deliberation study, this article offers sociological insights into the ways in which members of the public reason around assistive actions, be they performed by humans, machines or both.

Lehoux, P., Grimard, D. (2018). When robots care: Public deliberations on how technology and humans may support independent living for older adults, Social Science & Medicine.

This article looks at what kind of research was conducted on Health System challenges, where it was performed, in which health sectors and on which populations. It also identifies the types of challenge that were most present and how they varied across countries

Roncarolo, F., Boivin, A., Denis, J.-L., Hébert, R., Lehoux, P. (2017). What do we know about the needs and challenges of health systems? A scoping review of the international literature, BMC Health Services Research.

This article examines the rules that characterize economic policy, capital investment, and regulatory approval as well as the way these institutions enable and constrain the development of ventures at an early stage.

Lehoux, P., Daudelin, G., Denis, J.-L., Miller F.A. (2017). A Concurrent Analysis of Three Institutions that Transform Health Technology-Based Ventures: Economic Policy, Capital Investment, and Market Approval, Review of Policy Research.

Lehoux, P., Cheriet, I., Grimard, D. (2017). Que pense le public de la prévention dans le contexte de la médecine prédictive? Éthique, Médecine et Politique Publique.

This study explored interactions with device industry representatives among physicians who use implantable cardiovascular and orthopedic devices to identify whether conflict of interest (COI) is a concern and how it is managed.

Gagliardi, A., Lehoux, P., Ducey, A., Easty, A., Ross, S., Bell, C., Trbovich, P., Urbach, D. (2017). We can’t get along without each other: Qualitative interviews with physicians about device industry representatives, conflict of interest and patient safety, PLoS ONE. 

This chapter provides readers with clear guidance on the ways in which particular qualitative methods can help HTA practitioners to elicit patients’ perspectives, experiences and preferences.

Lehoux, P., Jimenez-Pernett, J., (2017). Making sense of patients’ perspectives, experiences and preferences in HTA (pp.215-224). In Facey, K., Hensen, H.P., Single, A.N.V. (Eds). Patient Involvement in Health Technology Assessment (HTA). Singapore: Springer.

This article seeks to deepen our understanding of the responsible research and innovation (RRI) approach as it relates to health care systems, where the notion of responsibility is already deeply embedded.

Demers-Payette, O., Lehoux, P., Daudelin, G. (2016). Responsible research and innovation: a productive model for the future of medical innovation, Journal of Responsible Innovation.

This article looks at a prospective method using multimedia material for public deliberations on health technology design.

Lehoux, P., Jimenez-Pernett, J., Miller, F. A., Williams-Jones, B. (2016). Assessment of a multimedia-based prospective method to support public deliberations on health technology design: participant survey findings and qualitative insights, BMC Health Services Research.

This paper clarifies why technology developers are pushed to prioritize design features that expedite sales, often to the detriment of design features that would increase the clinical value of their technology.

Lehoux & al. (2014). How do business models and health technology design influence each other? Insights from a longitudinal case study of three academic spin-offs, Research Policy.