No	Item	Details for This Study
Domain 1: Research team and reflexivity
Personal characteristics
1.	Interviewer/facilitator	Researchers from La Trobe University conducted the focus groups. The selected researchers were independent of the health services. The named researcher was Adjunct Professor Natasha Brusco.
2.	Credentials	Adjunct Professor Natasha Brusco: BPhysio, MPhysio, PhD.
3.	Occupation	Adjunct Professor Natasha Brusco: Researcher.
4.	Gender	Adjunct Professor Natasha Brusco: Female.
5.	Experience and training	Adjunct Professor Natasha Brusco: 5 years of experience leading qualitative research incorporating focus groups and interviews.
Relationship with participants
6.	Relationship established	A relationship between the focus group facilitators and the focus group participants was not established prior to study commencement.
7.	Participant knowledge of the interviewer	At the start of the focus groups the facilitators introduced themselves and provided a brief background, with no more detail than what was provided on the researchers university web-page.
8.	Interviewer characteristics	Select facilitator characteristics were shared at the start of the focus group. This included any potential sources of bias, assumptions about the topic based on previous experience, as well as reasons and interests in the research topic.
Domain 2: Study design
Theoretical framework
9.	Methodological orientation and theory	Across the eight focus groups, representing the eight health services, a content analysis was conducted to understand the depth and breadth of the digital capability and needs identified within the eight focus groups.
Participant selection
10.	Sampling	Purposeful sampling was used to select participants from each health service. This included participants representing the following digital technology perspectives: La Trobe University academic leader or proxy. Director of Nursing or proxy (a person who leads the implementation of the current areas of digital priority for the nursing profession). Director of Allied Health or proxy (a person who leads the implementation of the current areas of digital priority for the allied health profession).
11.	Method of approach	Participants were approached via an email from the health services’ La Trobe University academic leader.
12.	Sample size	It was estimated that within each of the eight focus groups, there would be 3 participants. The final number of participants was 23.
13.	Non-participation	No people refused to participate or dropped out.
Setting
14.	Setting of data collection	All focus groups were held over the ZOOM platform. Due to current work arrangements during the COVID-19 pandemic, the researchers, and the participants were physically located at their place of work, at home, or at another location.
15.	Presence of non-participants	Only the participants and researchers were present.
16.	Description of sample	Purposeful sampling were used to select participants from each health service. This included participants representing the following digital technology perspectives: La Trobe University academic leader or proxy. Director of Nursing or proxy (a person who leads the implementation of the current areas of digital priority for the nursing profession). Director of Allied Health or proxy (a person who leads the implementation of the current areas of digital priority for the allied health profession).
Data collection
17.	Interview/focus group guide	The focus group guide was piloted at one partner health service. This was reviewed and modified, as necessary prior to implementation at the other seven partner health services. Step 1—Seminar (1 h): Step 1—Prior to the focus groups, we invite all participants to engage in a WebEx Seminar where the following two documents were presented and discussed to give context to the focus group: “Victoria’s digital health roadmap; Improving patient care by lifting digital maturity in Victoria’s public health services 2021–2025” and the “Digital Health Capability Framework for Allied Health Professionals“. Step 2—Focus Group (1 h): Step 2—To determine the current digital maturity and digital capability of the nursing and allied health workforce across Victoria, we conducted a series of focus groups across the eight partner health services. Focus Group Guide Welcome to the focus group. Introduction to the topic and to one another. Note that the focus is health professional training, not undergraduate training. Note that we are hoping that this study will result in the co-design of a “map” which will describe how La Trobe University can support the digital needs of the healthcare industry partners through education and training. Discussion on the Victorian Digital Health Roadmap’s five programs of work: 1. Reliable and resilient systems; 2. Efficient, secure, paper-light health care; 3. Continuity of care; 4. Enabling virtual care and care closer to home; and 5. Consumer access and engagement. What is the current level of digital maturity that has been achieved in your healthcare organisation? Where do you want to be in 5-years? What training is required to get there? Discussion on the Digital health capability framework for allied health professionals four domains of digital health capability: Domain 1 The digital workplace; Domain 2 Digital professionalism; Domain 3 Data and informatics; and Domain 4 Digital transformation. What is the current digital capability of the nursing and allied health workforce in your healthcare organisation? Where do you want to be in 5-years? What training is required to get there? Thank all for participating. Remind all that what has been said is confidential and that they will receive a summary of the focus group for review and feedback.
18.	Repeat interviews	Repeat focus groups were not be carried out.
19.	Audio/visual recording	An audio/visual recording of the focus group was undertaken to enable the production of a transcript for analysis (via ZOOM).
20.	Field notes	Field notes were made during the focus group.
21.	Duration	Each focus group ran for 1 h in duration.
22.	Data saturation	During data analysis, data from the final two focus groups were examined for new themes emerging. If no new themes are detected when compared to the first six focus groups, it was be assumed that data saturation has been achieved.
23.	Transcripts returned	A summary of the focus group (not the full transcript) was returned to participants for comment and/or correction.
Domain 3: Analysis and findings
Data analysis
24.	Number of data coders	Two data coders coded the data.
25.	Description of the coding tree	The authors provided a description of the coding tree.
26.	Derivation of themes	Themes were identified in advance via the scoping review as derived from the data.
27.	Software	NVivo was be used to assist in the data coding.
28.	Participant checking	Participants were given the opportunity to provide feedback on the findings.
Reporting
29.	Quotations presented	Participant quotations were presented in the report/manuscript to illustrate the themes/findings. The quotations are not identifiable.
30.	Data and findings consistent	The research team ensured there was consistency between the data presented and the findings in the report/manuscript.
31.	Clarity of major themes	The research team ensured major themes were clearly presented in the findings in the report/manuscript.
32.	Clarity of minor themes	The research team ensured there was a discussion of minor themes in the report/manuscript.