Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41493182›Full record

SynthesisJournal of medical Internet research2026

Adoption of Internet of Things in Health Care: Weighted and Meta-Analytical Review of Theoretical Frameworks and Predictors.

Tiago Oliveira, Mijail Naranjo-Zolotov, Ricardo Martins, Stylianos Karatzas

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of medical Internet research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Tiago OliveiraNOVA Information Management School (NOVA IMS), Lisbon, Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6523-0809
Mijail Naranjo-ZolotovNOVA Information Management School (NOVA IMS), Lisbon, Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5153-3315
Ricardo MartinsNOVA Information Management School (NOVA IMS), Lisbon, Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8861-1791
Stylianos KaratzasDepartment of Product & Systems Design Engineering, University of the Aegean, Hermópolis, Greece.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8318-6100

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe integration of the Internet of Things (IoT) into health care is transforming the industry by enhancing disease care and management, as well as supporting self-health management. The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the adoption of IoT devices, particularly wearable medical devices, which enable real-time health monitoring and advanced remote health management. Globally, the increased adoption of IoT in health care has improved efficiency, enhanced patient care, and generated substantial economic value.

objectiveThis review aims to conduct a comprehensive meta- and weight analysis of quantitative studies to identify the most influential predictors and theoretical frameworks explaining the adoption of IoT in health care.

methodsWe searched databases, including Web of Science and PubMed, for quantitative studies on IoT health care adoption, with the last search conducted in early July 2025. Inclusion criteria comprised peer-reviewed articles written in English that employed a quantitative approach to IoT health care technology adoption. Studies were excluded if they did not report the significance of relationships, involved technologies without IoT features or were outside the scope, or examined target variables irrelevant to the analysis. The weight analysis identified the pathways with the most significant effects. A meta-analysis using a random-effects model was conducted to estimate combined effect sizes and their statistical significance. The results from both methods were then integrated to visualize the most frequently used theoretical frameworks. Risk of bias and heterogeneity were assessed using a funnel plot, Egger regression test, the I2 statistic, and subgroup analysis, which indicated no strong evidence of publication bias but revealed a high level of heterogeneity.

resultsAnalysis of 115 datasets from 109 papers identified the Technology Acceptance Model and the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) as the primary frameworks for explaining IoT adoption in health care. Incorporating context-specific variables-such as health consciousness, innovativeness, and trust-into these traditional technology acceptance frameworks enhances the understanding of IoT adoption. Although high heterogeneity suggests a need to refine theoretical models to account for regional contexts, universal adoption drivers such as performance expectancy and effort expectancy remain consistent.

conclusionsBehavioral intention is the most frequently studied variable in IoT health care adoption, whereas attitude, performance expectancy, effort expectancy, and task-technology fit remain underexplored. While adoption theories from the information systems field, such as the TAM, are predominantly used, integrating context-specific constructs and theories-such as trust and innovativeness-can provide deeper insights into IoT adoption in health care. The strongest and most consistent predictors of behavioral intention were attitude, performance expectancy, habit, self-efficacy, functional congruence, and benefits. Additionally, social influence, facilitating conditions, trust, and aesthetic appeal demonstrated promising or strong effects. By contrast, variables such as privacy and security, barriers, vulnerability, severity, compatibility, financial cost, health, and technology anxiety were generally inconsistent or not statistically significant.

Indexed as

BibliometricsDelivery of Health CareInternet of ThingsCOVID-19HumansSARS-CoV-2Telemedicineindividual adoptioninternet of thingsIoT health caremeta-analysisweight-analysis

Identifiers

PMID41493182
PMCPMC12820542

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.