IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stakeholder analysis in health innovation planning processes: A systematic scoping review


  • Franco-Trigo, L.
  • Fernandez-Llimos, F.
  • Martínez-Martínez, F.
  • Benrimoj, S.I.
  • Sabater-Hernández, D.


Integrating health innovations into the health system is a complex endeavour that requires a well-designed planning process engaging key stakeholders. Stakeholder analyses lay the foundations to inform appropriate planning processes and undertake strategic actions. A systematic scoping review was performed to explore how stakeholder analyses are applied in health innovation planning processes and a guideline to report stakeholder analyses was developed. The literature search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus and DOAJ; grey literature was sought using Google. Articles reporting stakeholder analyses during the planning process of health policies, systems, products and technologies, and services and delivery methods were included. Fifty-one records were incorporated in the qualitative synthesis. Stakeholder analyses were conducted worldwide, used in all types of health innovations, applied in all phases of the planning process and conducted both prospectively and retrospectively. The steps followed to perform stakeholder analysis, the methods used, the stakeholder attributes analysed and how authors reported the analyses were heterogeneous. Forty-one studies reported the identification of stakeholders, 50 differentiated/categorised them and 25 analysed stakeholder relationships. Only some authors proposed future actions based on the results obtained in their stakeholder analysis. A list of Reporting Items for Stakeholder Analysis (i.e., the RISA tool) is proposed to contribute to the reporting guidelines to enhancing the quality and transparency of health research.

Suggested Citation

  • Franco-Trigo, L. & Fernandez-Llimos, F. & Martínez-Martínez, F. & Benrimoj, S.I. & Sabater-Hernández, D., 2020. "Stakeholder analysis in health innovation planning processes: A systematic scoping review," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(10), pages 1083-1099.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:124:y:2020:i:10:p:1083-1099
    DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2020.06.012

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL:
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Nancy Pouloudi & Wendy Currie & Edgar A. Whitley, 2016. "Entangled Stakeholder Roles and Perceptions in Health Information Systems: A Longitudinal Study of the U.K. NHS N3 Network," Post-Print hal-01282317, HAL.
    2. Vos, Amber A. & van Voorst, Sabine F. & Steegers, Eric A.P. & Denktaş, Semiha, 2016. "Analysis of policy towards improvement of perinatal mortality in the Netherlands (2004–2011)," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 156-164.
    3. Silva, Maria Laura & Perrier, Lionel & Paget, John W. & Mosnier, Anne & Buthion, Valérie & Cohen, Jean Marie & Späth, Hans Martin, 2016. "Influenza vaccination policy-making processes in France and The Netherlands: Framework and determinants," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(3), pages 293-305.
    4. Horev, Tuvia & Babad, Yair M., 2005. "Healthcare reform implementation: stakeholders and their roles--the Israeli experience," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 1-21, January.
    5. David Moher & Alessandro Liberati & Jennifer Tetzlaff & Douglas G Altman & The PRISMA Group, 2009. "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(7), pages 1-6, July.
    6. Lim, Seunghoo & Lee, Keon-Hyung & Suh, Hae Sun & Bae, Kwi-Hee, 2014. "To whom do bureaucrats need to respond? Two faces of civil society in health policy," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 269-277.
    7. Pouloudi, Nancy & Currie, Wendy & Whitley, Edgar A., 2016. "Entangled stakeholder roles and perceptions in health information systems: a longitudinal study of the UK NHS N3 network," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 62275, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    8. John M Bryson, 2004. "What to do when Stakeholders matter," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 21-53, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Lepore, Dominique & Frontoni, Emanuele & Micozzi, Alessandra & Moccia, Sara & Romeo, Luca & Spigarelli, Francesca, 2023. "Uncovering the potential of innovation ecosystems in the healthcare sector after the COVID-19 crisis," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 80-86.
    2. Xiao, Jingjie & Brenneis, Carleen & Fassbender, Konrad, 2022. "Stakeholder perspectives towards implementing the national framework on palliative care in Canada," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(6), pages 576-583.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Medaglia, Rony & Eaton, Ben & Hedman, Jonas & Whitley, Edgar A., 2022. "Mechanisms of power inscription into IT governance: lessons from two national digital identity systems," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 108207, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Gregory, Amanda J. & Atkins, Jonathan P. & Midgley, Gerald & Hodgson, Anthony M., 2020. "Stakeholder identification and engagement in problem structuring interventions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 283(1), pages 321-340.
    3. Daniel Fürstenau & Carolin Auschra & Stefan Klein & Martin Gersch, 2019. "A process perspective on platform design and management: evidence from a digital platform in health care," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 29(4), pages 581-596, December.
    4. Choudrie, Jyoti & Manandhar, Nuga & Castro, Carolina & Obuekwe, Chikelue, 2023. "Hey Siri, Google! Can you help me? A qualitative case study of smartphones AI functions in SMEs," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    5. Ariana Polyviou & Efpraxia D. Zamani, 2023. "Are we Nearly There Yet? A Desires & Realities Framework for Europe’s AI Strategy," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 143-159, February.
    6. Bert George, 2017. "Does strategic planning ‘work’ in public organizations? Insights from Flemish municipalities," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(7), pages 527-530, November.
    7. İlkay Unay-Gailhard & Mark A. Brennen, 2022. "How digital communications contribute to shaping the career paths of youth: a review study focused on farming as a career option," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(4), pages 1491-1508, December.
    8. Mahin Ghafari & Vali Baigi & Zahra Cheraghi & Amin Doosti-Irani, 2016. "The Prevalence of Asymptomatic Bacteriuria in Iranian Pregnant Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(6), pages 1-10, June.
    9. Elizabeth T Cafiero-Fonseca & Andrew Stawasz & Sydney T Johnson & Reiko Sato & David E Bloom, 2017. "The full benefits of adult pneumococcal vaccination: A systematic review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(10), pages 1-23, October.
    10. Santos Urbina & Sofía Villatoro & Jesús Salinas, 2021. "Self-Regulated Learning and Technology-Enhanced Learning Environments in Higher Education: A Scoping Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-12, June.
    11. Oded Berger-Tal & Alison L Greggor & Biljana Macura & Carrie Ann Adams & Arden Blumenthal & Amos Bouskila & Ulrika Candolin & Carolina Doran & Esteban Fernández-Juricic & Kiyoko M Gotanda & Catherine , 2019. "Systematic reviews and maps as tools for applying behavioral ecology to management and policy," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 30(1), pages 1-8.
    12. Nadine Desrochers & Adèle Paul‐Hus & Jen Pecoskie, 2017. "Five decades of gratitude: A meta‐synthesis of acknowledgments research," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(12), pages 2821-2833, December.
    13. Maryono, Maryono & Killoes, Aditya Marendra & Adhikari, Rajendra & Abdul Aziz, Ammar, 2024. "Agriculture development through multi-stakeholder partnerships in developing countries: A systematic literature review," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    14. Alene Sze Jing Yong & Yi Heng Lim & Mark Wing Loong Cheong & Ednin Hamzah & Siew Li Teoh, 2022. "Willingness-to-pay for cancer treatment and outcome: a systematic review," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(6), pages 1037-1057, August.
    15. Xue-Ying Xu & Hong Kong & Rui-Xiang Song & Yu-Han Zhai & Xiao-Fei Wu & Wen-Si Ai & Hong-Bo Liu, 2014. "The Effectiveness of Noninvasive Biomarkers to Predict Hepatitis B-Related Significant Fibrosis and Cirrhosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(6), pages 1-16, June.
    16. Vicente Miñana-Signes & Manuel Monfort-Pañego & Javier Valiente, 2021. "Teaching Back Health in the School Setting: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(3), pages 1-18, January.
    17. Agnieszka A. Tubis & Katarzyna Grzybowska, 2022. "In Search of Industry 4.0 and Logistics 4.0 in Small-Medium Enterprises—A State of the Art Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(22), pages 1-26, November.
    18. Obsa Urgessa Ayana & Jima Degaga, 2022. "Effects of rural electrification on household welfare: a meta-regression analysis," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 69(2), pages 209-261, June.
    19. Caloffi, Annalisa & Colovic, Ana & Rizzoli, Valentina & Rossi, Federica, 2023. "Innovation intermediaries' types and functions: A computational analysis of the literature," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    20. García-Poole, Chloe & Byrne, Sonia & Rodrigo, María José, 2019. "How do communities intervene with adolescents at psychosocial risk? A systematic review of positive development programs," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 194-209.


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:124:y:2020:i:10:p:1083-1099. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.