Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39055076›Full record

ArticleSaudi journal of medicine & medical sciences

Development and Validation of the Saudi Telehealth Acceptance Scale Based on the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology.

Abdullah A Almojaibel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Saudi journal of medicine & medical sciences. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

1 author.

Abdullah A AlmojaibelDepartment of Respiratory Care, College of Applied Medical Sciences, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, Dammam, Saudi Arabia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Telehealth is in early stages in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). Identifying barriers to using telehealth is an essential step prior to its implementation; however, no theoretically based scales exist for the same purpose. Objective: To design a theory-based scale capable of measuring telehealth users' perceptions of benefits, barriers, and social influence in the KSA. Methods: The Saudi Telehealth Acceptance Scale (STAS) was constructed based on the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology and its content validity was determined by eight experts using the modified Delphi process. Only items with a content validity index score of ≥0.83 were chosen. Finally, the face validity of the questionnaire for healthcare professionals, which was in English, was determined by eight healthcare professionals, and for the patient version, which was in Arabic, by six patients. Results: Initially, 37 items were identified; however, after Round 1, 29 items remained and after Round 2, 24 items were included in the STAS for both healthcare professionals and patients. In the healthcare professionals scale, there were 7 performance expectancy (PE) items, 6 effort expectancy (EE) items, 3 social influence (SI) items, 4 facilitating conditions (FC) items, and 4 behavioral intention (BI) items, while in the scale for patients, there were 9 PE items, 4 EE items, 3 SI items, 4 FC items, and 4 BI items. Conclusions: The two new scales showed evidence of content and face validity. The significance of the two scales is that they were both designed in the context of the healthcare system in the KSA and could provide standardized data collection tools to measure the acceptance of telehealth among HCPs and patients.

Indexed as

Acceptancecontent validityface validityhealthcare practitionerspatientspsychometricstelehealthtelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID39055076
PMCPMC11268542

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.