TY - JOUR
T1 - A multidisciplinary model for the governance of clinical innovation
T2 - insights from a qualitative study of Australian doctors
AU - Wiersma, Miriam
AU - Kerridge, Ian
AU - Lipworth, Wendy
PY - 2025/3/20
Y1 - 2025/3/20
N2 - Clinical innovation by doctors involves the development and use of interventions that have not been formally evaluated according to the usual standards of evidence-based medicine. While the distinction between research and innovation has been discussed theoretically, little is known about how doctors working in different specialty areas define and understand clinical innovation and how they distinguish it from other related practices. In order to address this gap, this qualitative interview study explored how doctors from diverse specialties defined and understood clinical innovation. Thirty-one semi-structured interviews were conducted with Australian doctors from surgery, reproductive medicine, and cancer care. While participants defined clinical innovation in similar ways, they also identified several morally and clinically salient characteristics that distinguish different types of innovation. Based on these findings, we developed a multidisciplinary governance model for clinical innovation that accounts for its diversity and complexity. This governance model offers clear guidance for determining what types of oversight are most appropriate for different types of clinical innovation. Its benefits include that it can be applied across diverse medical specialties and used alongside existing models, such as those used to identify clinical innovation.
AB - Clinical innovation by doctors involves the development and use of interventions that have not been formally evaluated according to the usual standards of evidence-based medicine. While the distinction between research and innovation has been discussed theoretically, little is known about how doctors working in different specialty areas define and understand clinical innovation and how they distinguish it from other related practices. In order to address this gap, this qualitative interview study explored how doctors from diverse specialties defined and understood clinical innovation. Thirty-one semi-structured interviews were conducted with Australian doctors from surgery, reproductive medicine, and cancer care. While participants defined clinical innovation in similar ways, they also identified several morally and clinically salient characteristics that distinguish different types of innovation. Based on these findings, we developed a multidisciplinary governance model for clinical innovation that accounts for its diversity and complexity. This governance model offers clear guidance for determining what types of oversight are most appropriate for different types of clinical innovation. Its benefits include that it can be applied across diverse medical specialties and used alongside existing models, such as those used to identify clinical innovation.
KW - governance
KW - innovation ethics
KW - innovation oversight
KW - medical innovation
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=105000911080&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/01632787251324662
DO - 10.1177/01632787251324662
M3 - Article
C2 - 40114342
AN - SCOPUS:105000911080
SN - 0163-2787
JO - Evaluation and the Health Professions
JF - Evaluation and the Health Professions
ER -