Stakeholder perceptions on institutional design of digital health regulatory frameworks: insights from Kenya, Rwanda and Uganda

Digital health holds significant promise for transforming healthcare but presents several risks to patients and providers, especially in fragmented regulatory terrains. Experts have articulated the need for clear digital health regulatory frameworks, but there is uncertainty surrounding the design of such frameworks with governments adopting varied models, spanning both formal and informal mechanisms. Using content analysis and a stakeholder dialogue with focus group discussions, we aimed to assess stakeholders' perceptions of the benefits, costs, risks and trade-offs of different forms of regulatory frameworks in low- and middle-income countries, focusing on Kenya, Rwanda and Uganda. Stakeholders consider both formal and informal regulatory approaches to be beneficial, citing regulatory maturity, political will and financial support as key factors to consider. However, the aim of regulatory design should be patient protection, the key concern being how best to protect individuals' and engender trust between citizens and government. Moreover, while stakeholder engagement is crucial, this should be done with a clear aim and is likely best done in the latter stages of regulation to facilitate peer review of initial regulatory efforts. Overall, context-specific, iterative strategies are key for digital health regulatory design, with patient protection, inclusive stakeholder engagement, flexible regulatory tools and enduring political and institutional support being key factors to consider.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Oxford Open Digital Health
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/oodh/oqaf010
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Healthcare Systems and Reforms
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.21

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Stakeholder perceptions on institutional design of digital health regulatory frameworks: insights from Kenya, Rwanda and Uganda

Sharifah Sekalala, Shajoe J. Lake
1 citations
Oxford Open Digital Health
Healthcare Systems and Reforms
2.21
article

Stakeholder perceptions on institutional design of digital health regulatory frameworks: insights from Kenya, Rwanda and Uganda

Sharifah Sekalala, Shajoe J. Lake
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Digital health holds significant promise for transforming healthcare but presents several risks to patients and providers, especially in fragmented regulatory terrains. Experts have articulated the need for clear digital health regulatory frameworks, but there is uncertainty surrounding the design of such frameworks with governments adopting varied models, spanning both formal and informal mechanisms. Using content analysis and a stakeholder dialogue with focus group discussions, we aimed to assess stakeholders' perceptions of the benefits, costs, risks and trade-offs of different forms of regulatory frameworks in low- and middle-income countries, focusing on Kenya, Rwanda and Uganda. Stakeholders consider both formal and informal regulatory approaches to be beneficial, citing regulatory maturity, political will and financial support as key factors to consider. However, the aim of regulatory design should be patient protection, the key concern being how best to protect individuals' and engender trust between citizens and government. Moreover, while stakeholder engagement is crucial, this should be done with a clear aim and is likely best done in the latter stages of regulation to facilitate peer review of initial regulatory efforts. Overall, context-specific, iterative strategies are key for digital health regulatory design, with patient protection, inclusive stakeholder engagement, flexible regulatory tools and enduring political and institutional support being key factors to consider.

Oxford Open Digital HealthVol. 3
University of Warwick (GB)
Wellcome Trust
Openalex Percentile: Top 14%
Healthcare Systems and Reforms
2.21
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.