ArticleJMIR aging2025
Transcultural Adaptation, Validation, Psychometric Analysis, and Interpretation of the 22-Item Thai Senior Technology Acceptance Model for Mobile Health Apps: Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in JMIR aging, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe rapid advancement of technology has made mobile health (mHealth) a promising tool to mitigate health problems, particularly among older adults. Despite the numerous benefits of mHealth, assessing individual acceptance is required to address the specific needs of older people and promote their intention to use mHealth.
objectiveThis study aims to adapt and validate the senior technology acceptance model (STAM) questionnaire for assessing mHealth acceptance in the Thai context.
methodsIn this cross-sectional study, we adapted the original, 38-item, English version of the STAM using a 10-point Likert scale for mHealth acceptability among the Thai population. We translated the mHealth STAM into Thai using forward and backward translation. A total of 15 older adults and experts completed the pilot questionnaire and were interviewed to assess its validity. The pilot items of the Thai mHealth STAM were then reworded and revised for better comprehension and cross-cultural compatibility. The construct validity of the Thai mHealth STAM was evaluated by a multidimensional approach, including exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis and nonparametric item response theory analysis. Discriminative indices consisting of sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) were used to determine appropriate banding and discriminant validity for the intention to use mHealth. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach α and McDonald ω coefficients.
resultsOut of the 1100 participants with a mean age of 62.3 (SD 8.8) years, 360 (32.7%) were adults aged 45-59 years, and 740 (67.3%) were older adults aged 60 years and older. Of the 40-item pilot questionnaire, exploratory factor analysis identified 22 items with factor loadings >0.4 across 7 principal components, explaining 91.45% of the variance. Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed that 9-dimensional sets of 22 items had satisfactory fit indices (comparative fit index=0.976, Tucker-Lewis index=0.968, root mean square error of approximation=0.043, standardized root mean squared residual=0.044, and R
conclusionsThe 22-item Thai mHealth STAM demonstrated satisfactory psychometric properties in both validity and reliability. The questionnaire has the potential to serve as a practical questionnaire in assessing the acceptance and intention to use mHealth among pre-older and older adults.
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.