Governing partnerships with technology companies as part of the COVID-19 response in Canada: A qualitative case study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cross-sector partnerships are vital for maintaining resilient health systems; however, few studies have sought to empirically assess the barriers and enablers of effective and responsible partnerships during public health emergencies. Through a qualitative, multiple case study, we analyzed 210 documents and conducted 26 interviews with stakeholders in three real-world partnerships between Canadian health organizations and private technology startups during the COVID-19 pandemic. The three partnerships involved: 1) deploying a virtual care platform to care for COVID-19 patients at one hospital, 2) deploying a secure messaging platform for physicians at another hospital, and 3) using data science to support a public health organization. Our results demonstrate that a public health emergency created time and resource pressures throughout a partnership. Given these constraints, early and sustained alignment on the core problem was critical for success. Moreover, governance processes designed for normal operations, such as procurement, were triaged and streamlined. Social learning, or the process of learning from observing others, offset some time and resource pressures. Social learning took many forms ranging from informal conversations between individuals at peer organisations (e.g., hospital chief information officers) to standing meetings at the local university's city-wide COVID-19 response table. We also found that startups' flexibility and understanding of the local context enabled them to play a highly valuable role in emergency response. However, pandemic fueled "hypergrowth" created risks for startups, such as introducing opportunities for deviation away from their core value proposition. Finally, we found each partnership navigated intense workloads, burnout, and personnel turnover through the pandemic. Strong partnerships required healthy, motivated teams. Visibility into and engagement in partnership governance, belief in partnership impact, and strong emotional intelligence in managers promoted team well-being. Taken together, these findings can help to bridge the theory-to-practice gap and guide effective cross-sector partnerships during public health emergencies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.038 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".