Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28679423›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2017

Electronic Health Record Portal Adoption: a cross country analysis.

Jorge Tavares, Tiago Oliveira

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Getting Connected to M-Health Technologies through a Meta-Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. The Use of Digital Healthcare Platforms During the COVID-19 Pandemic: the Consumer Perspective.Acta informatica medica : AIM : journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina : casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH · 2021
    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

2 authors.

Jorge TavaresNOVA IMS, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Campus de Campolide, 1070-312, Lisbon, Portugal. d2012072@novaims.unl.pt.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5551-8243
Tiago OliveiraNOVA IMS, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Campus de Campolide, 1070-312, Lisbon, Portugal.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study's goal is to understand the factors that drive individuals to adopt Electronic Health Record (EHR) portals and to estimate if there are differences between countries with different healthcare models.

methodsWe applied a new adoption model using as a starting point the extended Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT2) by incorporating the Concern for Information Privacy (CFIP) framework. To evaluate the research model we used the partial least squares (PLS) - structural equation modelling (SEM) approach. An online questionnaire was administrated in the United States (US) and Europe (Portugal). We collected 597 valid responses.

resultsThe statistically significant factors of behavioural intention are performance expectancy ([Formula: see text]

conclusionsOur study identified critical factors for the adoption of EHR portals and significant differences between the countries. Confidentiality issues do not seem to influence acceptance. The EHR portals usage patterns are significantly higher in US compared to Portugal.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsTechnology TransferHumansModels, TheoreticalPortugalUnited StateseHealthElectronic Health RecordsHealthcare consumersTechnology adoptionUTAUT2

Identifiers

PMID28679423
PMCPMC5499062

What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.