This research challenges the HCI community to confront its role in perpetuating healthcare inequities, demands a fundamental rethinking and proposes a new framework for healthcare innovation that prioritizes human relationships over technical capability, systemic change over feature sets, and actual care delivery over technological ambition.
Abstract
The healthcare industry's enthusiastic adoption of Extended Reality (XR) technologies obscures a concerning reality: we were building increasingly sophisticated ways to perpetuate fundamentally broken healthcare systems. Through three deeply personal narratives - a rural patient cut off from care infrastructure, an urban professional navigating fragmented services, and a first-generation immigrant confronting cultural barriers - this provocation paper exposes how our obsession with technological innovation often worsens rather than resolves healthcare disparities. By applying the SEIPS 3.0 model to examine diabetes-CVD care coordination, we identify an"innovation paradox"where advanced technology creates new barriers to effective care. Our care interdependencies framework reveals that healthcare outcomes are shaped primarily by human relationships (50-60%), organizational coordination (25-30%), and sociocultural factors (15-20%), not technological sophistication. This research challenges the HCI community to confront its role in perpetuating healthcare inequities, demands a fundamental rethinking and proposes a new framework for healthcare innovation that prioritizes human relationships over technical capability, systemic change over feature sets, and actual care delivery over technological ambition. For healthcare providers, technology developers, and policymakers, our findings suggest that effective care coordination requires us to step back from our techno-solutionist mindset and engage
This publication proposes a definition and a classification of agile software development approaches and analyses ten software development methods that can be characterized as being "agile" against the defined criterion.
P. Abrahamsson, O. Salo, Jussi Ronkainen et al.· arXiv.org· 727 citations· ⚡54
The study shows that agile practices improve both informal and formal communication, but indicates that, in larger development situations involving multiple external stakeholders, a mismatch of adequate communication mechanisms can sometimes even hinder the communication.
M. Pikkarainen, Jukka Haikara, O. Salo et al.· Empirical Software Engineeri...· 401 citations· ⚡48
The results indicate that software engineering work practices are chosen opportunistically, adapted and configured to provide value under the constrains imposed by the startup context.
Nicolò Paternoster, Carmine Giardino, M. Unterkalmsteiner et al.· Information and Software Tec...· 394 citations· ⚡54
The perception of the impact of agile methods is predominantly positive, and several challenge areas were discovered, but based on this study, agile methods are here to stay.
M. Laanti, O. Salo, P. Abrahamsson· Information and Software Tec...· 260 citations· ⚡20
Students in MIT’s Concourse program delve deeply into the human condition, debate challenging questions, and learn to develop judgment about issues that can’t be quantified.
Jennifer Neville did not want to go into computer science—but that’s exactly where she landed. Neville discusses the starts and stops that led to her professional sweet spot and her work identifying “surprising failures” making it hard for AI to handle complexity. The post What AI gets wrong and what failure teaches us appeared first on Microsoft Research.
MIT News · Artificial Intelligence· news.mit.eduSep 30, 2026
Able to defeat top-ranked human players and more efficient than other models, the new system could help decision-makers in military maneuvers or business negotiations.
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.