{"title":"Legitimacy as Social Infrastructure: A Critical Interpretive Synthesis of the Literature on Legitimacy in Health and Technology.","authors":"Sydney Howe, Carin Uyl-de Groot, Rik Wehrens","doi":"10.2196/48955","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>As technology is integrated into health care delivery, research on adoption and acceptance of health technologies leaves large gaps in practice and provides limited explanation of how and why certain technologies are adopted and others are not. In these discussions, the concept of legitimacy is omnipresent but often implicit and underdeveloped. There is no agreement about what legitimacy is or how it works across social science disciplines, despite a prolific volume of the literature centering legitimacy.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aims to explore the meaning of legitimacy in health and technology as conceptualized in the distinctive disciplines of organization and management studies, science and technology studies, and medical anthropology and sociology, including how legitimacy is produced and used. This allows us to critically combine insights across disciplines and generate new theory.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a critical interpretive synthesis literature review. Searches were conducted iteratively and were guided by preset eligibility criteria determined through thematic analysis, beginning with the selection of disciplines, followed by journals, and finally articles. We selected disciplines and journals in organization and management studies, science and technology studies, and medical anthropology and sociology using results from the Scopus and Web of Science databases and disciplinary expert-curated journal lists, focusing on the depth of legitimacy conceptualization. We selected 30 journals, yielding 796 abstracts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 97 articles were included. The synthesis of the literature allowed us to produce a novel conceptualization of legitimacy as a form of social infrastructure, approaching legitimacy as a binding fabric of relationships, narratives, and materialities. We argue that the notion of legitimacy as social infrastructure is a flexible and adaptable framework for working with legitimacy both theoretically and practically.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The legitimacy as social infrastructure framework can aid both academics and decision makers by providing more coherent and holistic explanations for how and why new technologies are adopted or not in health care practice. For academics, our framework makes legitimacy and technology adoption empirically approachable from an ethnographic perspective; for decision makers, legitimacy as social infrastructure allows for a practical, action-oriented focus that can be assessed iteratively at any stage of the technology development and implementation process.</p>","PeriodicalId":36351,"journal":{"name":"JMIR Human Factors","volume":"12 ","pages":"e48955"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11923462/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR Human Factors","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/48955","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: As technology is integrated into health care delivery, research on adoption and acceptance of health technologies leaves large gaps in practice and provides limited explanation of how and why certain technologies are adopted and others are not. In these discussions, the concept of legitimacy is omnipresent but often implicit and underdeveloped. There is no agreement about what legitimacy is or how it works across social science disciplines, despite a prolific volume of the literature centering legitimacy.
Objective: This study aims to explore the meaning of legitimacy in health and technology as conceptualized in the distinctive disciplines of organization and management studies, science and technology studies, and medical anthropology and sociology, including how legitimacy is produced and used. This allows us to critically combine insights across disciplines and generate new theory.
Methods: We conducted a critical interpretive synthesis literature review. Searches were conducted iteratively and were guided by preset eligibility criteria determined through thematic analysis, beginning with the selection of disciplines, followed by journals, and finally articles. We selected disciplines and journals in organization and management studies, science and technology studies, and medical anthropology and sociology using results from the Scopus and Web of Science databases and disciplinary expert-curated journal lists, focusing on the depth of legitimacy conceptualization. We selected 30 journals, yielding 796 abstracts.
Results: A total of 97 articles were included. The synthesis of the literature allowed us to produce a novel conceptualization of legitimacy as a form of social infrastructure, approaching legitimacy as a binding fabric of relationships, narratives, and materialities. We argue that the notion of legitimacy as social infrastructure is a flexible and adaptable framework for working with legitimacy both theoretically and practically.
Conclusions: The legitimacy as social infrastructure framework can aid both academics and decision makers by providing more coherent and holistic explanations for how and why new technologies are adopted or not in health care practice. For academics, our framework makes legitimacy and technology adoption empirically approachable from an ethnographic perspective; for decision makers, legitimacy as social infrastructure allows for a practical, action-oriented focus that can be assessed iteratively at any stage of the technology development and implementation process.
背景:随着技术融入卫生保健服务,关于采用和接受卫生技术的研究在实践中留下了很大的空白,并且对如何以及为什么采用某些技术而不采用其他技术提供了有限的解释。在这些讨论中,合法性的概念无处不在,但往往是隐含的和不发达的。关于合法性是什么,以及它如何在社会科学学科中发挥作用,人们没有达成一致意见,尽管有大量关于合法性的文献。目的:本研究旨在探讨在组织管理研究、科学技术研究、医学人类学和社会学等独特学科中概念化的健康和技术合法性的意义,包括合法性是如何产生和使用的。这使我们能够批判性地结合跨学科的见解并产生新的理论。方法:我们进行了批判性的解释性综合文献综述。检索是迭代进行的,并以通过主题分析确定的预设资格标准为指导,从选择学科开始,然后是期刊,最后是文章。我们选择了组织与管理研究、科学与技术研究、医学人类学和社会学的学科和期刊,使用了来自Scopus和Web of science数据库的结果以及学科专家策划的期刊列表,重点关注合法性概念化的深度。我们选择了30本期刊,共计796篇摘要。结果:共纳入97篇文献。对文献的综合使我们能够将合法性作为一种社会基础结构的形式产生一种新的概念化,将合法性作为一种关系、叙事和物质的结合结构来接近。我们认为,合法性作为社会基础设施的概念是一个灵活和适应性强的框架,可以在理论上和实践中处理合法性问题。结论:作为社会基础设施框架的合法性可以通过为卫生保健实践中如何以及为什么采用新技术提供更连贯和全面的解释来帮助学术界和决策者。对于学者来说,我们的框架使得合法性和技术采用可以从民族志的角度进行实证研究;对于决策者来说,作为社会基础设施的合法性允许在技术开发和实施过程的任何阶段迭代地评估实际的、面向行动的重点。