ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2023
Public attitudes towards the use of novel technologies in their future healthcare: a UK survey.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Exergaming for dementia and mild cognitive impairment.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- National Acceptance and Determinants of Immersive Extended Reality in Health Care in China: Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Public perceptions of AI in healthcare: a large-scale BERTopic and sentiment analysis of Reddit discussions.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- The Correlation Between Attitudes Towards Health Technologies and Professional Self-Efficacy in Intensive Care Nurses: A Cross-Sectional Study.International nursing review · 2025Article
- Toward equitable regenerative medicine: a health equity research framework for emerging regenerative treatments.Regenerative medicine · 2025Review
- Public Understanding and Expectations of Digital Health Evidence Generation: Focus Group Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Feasibility of a multimodal AI-based clinical assessment platform in emergency care: an exploratory pilot study.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Article
- The public attitude towards ChatGPT on reddit: A study based on unsupervised learning from sentiment analysis and topic modeling.PloS one · 2024Article
- Mobile health management among end stage renal disease patients: a scoping review.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundInnovation in healthcare technologies can result in more convenient and effective treatment that is less costly, but a persistent challenge to widespread adoption in health and social care is end user acceptability. The purpose of this study was to capture UK public opinions and attitudes to novel healthcare technologies (NHTs), and to better understand the factors that contribute to acceptance and future use.
methodsAn online survey was distributed to the UK public between April and May 2020. Respondents received brief information about four novel healthcare technologies (NHTs) in development: a laser-based tool for early diagnosis of osteoarthritis, a virtual reality tool to support diabetes self-management, a non-invasive continuous glucose monitor using microwave signals, a mobile app for patient reported monitoring of rheumatoid arthritis. They were queried on their general familiarity and attitudes to technology, and their willingness to accept each NHT in their future care. Responses were analysed using summary statistics and content analysis.
resultsKnowledge about NHTs was diverse, with respondents being more aware about the health applications of mobile apps (66%), followed by laser-based technology (63.8%), microwave signalling (28%), and virtual reality (18.3%). Increasing age and the presence of a self-reported medical condition favoured acceptability for some NHTs, whereas self-reported understanding of how the NHT works resulted in elevated acceptance scores across all NHTs presented. Common contributors to hesitancy were safety and risks from use. Respondents wanted more information and evidence to help inform their decisions, ideally provided verbally by a general practitioner or health professional. Other concerns, such as privacy, were NHT-specific but equally important in decision-making.
conclusionsEarly insight into the knowledge and preconceptions of the public about NHTs in development can assist their design and prospectively mitigate obstacles to acceptance and adoption.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.