ArticleDigital health
A public value-based model to understand patients' adoption of eHealth: Theoretical underpinnings and empirical application.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patient-Engaged AI: The Nursing Path to Health Equity.SAGE open nursingArticle
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The main objective of this study is to develop an eHealth adoption model based on patients' perceptions of public value dimensions and empirically apply the model to understand the adoption of a governmental health app by Jordanian patients. The study attempts to contribute to overcoming the narrow focus of contemporary theories such as UTAUT and, ultimately, to designing more effective implementation strategies in order to address the current delays in global eHealth adoption. Methods: We conducted a quantitative survey of 430 Jordanian patients, utilizing structural equation modeling (SEM) to process the empirical data. Specifically, we applied an SEM two-step approach that involved (a) evaluating the model-data fit through a review of the measurement model(s) and common method bias; and (b) analyzing the structural model. Results: Our findings confirm that the proposed patients' value scale is valid and reliable. Its five dimensions (hedonistic motivation, utilitarian motivation, social value, ethical public value, and public trust value) significantly correlate with patients' public value, and the latter directly affects their use of eHealth apps, with habits mediating this relationship. Among the dimensions, hedonistic motivations tend to be prioritized over utilitarian ones. Ethical and trust values also play an essential role, particularly in how health technology handles patients' data and upholds their dignity and self-esteem. Conclusions: This study highlights the holistic nature of eHealth adoption by patients and the crucial role of public values in their use behavior. It provides useful insights for policymakers and developers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.