Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36878620›Full record

ArticleBMJ health & care informatics2023

Predicting healthcare professionals' acceptance towards electronic personal health record systems in a resource-limited setting: using modified technology acceptance model.

Agmasie Damtew Walle, Tigist Andargie Ferede, Nebebe Demis Baykemagn, Aynadis Worku Shimie, Shimels Derso Kebede, Masresha Derese Tegegne, Sisay Maru Wubante, Chalachew Msganaw Yehula, Addisalem Workie Demsash, Mequannent Sharew Melaku and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ health & care informatics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
24.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Conceptualizing Patient as an Organization With the Adoption of Digital Health.Biomedical engineering and computational biology · 2024
    Article
  20. 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

11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Agmasie Damtew WalleDepartment of Health Informatics, Mettu University, Mettu, Ethiopia agmasie89@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9583-5876
Tigist Andargie FeredeDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Gondar, Gondar, Ethiopia.
Nebebe Demis BaykemagnDepartment of Health Informatics, University of Gondar, Gondar, Ethiopia.
Aynadis Worku ShimieDepartment of Health Informatics, Debre Markos University College of Health Science, Debre Markos, Ethiopia.
Shimels Derso KebedeDepartment of Health Informatics, Wollo University, Dessie, Ethiopia.
Masresha Derese TegegneDepartment of Health Informatics, University of Gondar, Gondar, Ethiopia.
Sisay Maru WubanteDepartment of Health Informatics, University of Gondar, Gondar, Ethiopia.
Chalachew Msganaw YehulaDepartment of Health Informatics, University of Gondar, Gondar, Ethiopia.
Addisalem Workie DemsashDepartment of Health Informatics, Mettu University, Mettu, Ethiopia.
Mequannent Sharew MelakuDepartment of Health Informatics, University of Gondar, Gondar, Ethiopia.
Muluken Belachew MengistieDepartment of Health Informatics, Debre Markos University College of Health Science, Debre Markos, Ethiopia.
University of Gondar · ETDebre Markos University · ETEthiopian Civil Service University · ETWollo University · ET

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesPersonal health record systems allow users to manage their health information in a confidential manner. However, there is little evidence about healthcare providers' intentions to use such technologies in resource-limited settings. Therefore, this study aimed to assess predicting healthcare providers' acceptance of electronic personal health record systems.

methodsAn institutional-based cross-sectional study was conducted from 19 July to 23 August 2022 at teaching hospitals in the Amhara regional state of Ethiopia. A total of 638 health professionals participated in the study. Simple random sampling techniques were used to select the study participants. Structural equation modelling analysis was employed using AMOS V.26 software.

resultPerceived ease of use had a significant effect on the intention to use electronic personal health records (β=0. 377, p<0.01), perceived usefulness (β=0.104, p<0.05) and attitude (β=0.204, p<0.01); perceived ease of use and information technology experience had a significant effect on perceived usefulness (β=0.077, p<0.05); and digital literacy (β=0.087, p<0.05) and attitude had also a strong effect on intention to use electronic personal health records (β=0.361, p<0.01). The relationship between perceived ease of use and the intention to use was mediated by attitude (β=0.076, p<0.01).

conclusionPerceived ease of use, attitude and digital literacy had a significant effect on the intention to use electronic personal health records. The perceived ease of use had a greater influence on the intention to use electronic personal health record systems. Thus, capacity building and technical support could enhance health providers' acceptance of using electronic personal health records in Ethiopia.

Indexed as

Health Records, PersonalTechnologyCross-Sectional StudiesElectronicsEthiopiaHealth PersonnelHumansResource-Limited SettingsSoftwareelectronic health recordspublic health informaticsrecord systems

Identifiers

PMID36878620
PMCPMC9990677
OpenAlexW4323348390

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.