Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32130167›Full record

SynthesisJMIR mHealth and uHealth2020

Social, Organizational, and Technological Factors Impacting Clinicians' Adoption of Mobile Health Tools: Systematic Literature Review.

Christine Jacob, Antonio Sanchez-Vazquez, Chris Ivory

Erratum issuedAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 162 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
162citing papers in PubMed, 11 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

162 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

102 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Christine JacobAnglia Ruskin University, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-8817-0148
Antonio Sanchez-VazquezInnovation and Management Practice Research Centre, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-1241-8098
Chris IvoryInnovation and Management Practice Research Centre, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-1567-3294

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is a growing body of evidence highlighting the potential of mobile health (mHealth) in reducing health care costs, enhancing access, and improving the quality of patient care. However, user acceptance and adoption are key prerequisites to harness this potential; hence, a deeper understanding of the factors impacting this adoption is crucial for its success.

objectiveThe aim of this review was to systematically explore relevant published literature to synthesize the current understanding of the factors impacting clinicians' adoption of mHealth tools, not only from a technological perspective but also from social and organizational perspectives.

methodsA structured search was carried out of MEDLINE, PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and the SAGE database for studies published between January 2008 and July 2018 in the English language, yielding 4993 results, of which 171 met the inclusion criteria. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines and the Cochrane handbook were followed to ensure a systematic process.

resultsThe technological factors impacting clinicians' adoption of mHealth tools were categorized into eight key themes: usefulness, ease of use, design, compatibility, technical issues, content, personalization, and convenience, which were in turn divided into 14 subthemes altogether. Social and organizational factors were much more prevalent and were categorized into eight key themes: workflow related, patient related, policy and regulations, culture or attitude or social influence, monetary factors, evidence base, awareness, and user engagement. These were divided into 41 subthemes, highlighting the importance of considering these factors when addressing potential barriers to mHealth adoption and how to overcome them.

conclusionsThe study results can help inform mHealth providers and policymakers regarding the key factors impacting mHealth adoption, guiding them into making educated decisions to foster this adoption and harness the potential benefits.

Indexed as

Mobile ApplicationsTelemedicineHumansOrganizationsPublicationscell or mobile phoneeHealthelectronic health recordhealth educationmHealthmobile healthperceptionpublic health practicesmartphonetechnologytelehealthtelemedicineworkflowworkloadworkplace

Identifiers

PMID32130167
PMCPMC7059085

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.