ArticleJMIR formative research2024
Acceptance and Use of eHealth in Support and Psychological Therapy for People With Intellectual Disabilities: Two Cross-Sectional Studies of Health Care Professionals.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology Questionnaire in Swedish Prehospital Care: Translation, Cross-Cultural Adaptation, and Pilot Psychometric Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Applying the UTAUT Model to Analyze Healthcare Professionals' Behavioural Intention to Use Hospital Information Systems: A Cross-Sectional Study in a Multi-Specialty Hospital.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Intention to use a health information platform in supportive housing for people with disabilities: An application of the UTAUT model.PloS one · 2025Article
- Toward successful eHealth adoption in long-term care: Insights from a national survey of healthcare professionals.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAcceptance of health care professionals is of paramount importance for the uptake and implementation of eHealth. The Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) model is a widely used framework for studying health care professionals' acceptance and actual use of eHealth among general client populations. However, there is limited understanding of the eHealth acceptance of health care professionals working with people with intellectual disabilities (ID).
objectiveThis study aimed to explore the applicability of the UTAUT model toward understanding the acceptance, intention to use, and actual use of eHealth among support staff and therapists working with people with ID.
methodsA total of 2 cross-sectional survey studies were conducted among health care professionals from 5 health care organizations for people with ID in the Netherlands in 2018 (n=311) and in 2021 during the COVID-19 pandemic (n=326). In addition to confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses to evaluate both the original UTAUT model and an extended version, descriptive analysis was used to explore participants' characteristics, acceptance levels, and eHealth usage. Moderator analysis and multiple regression analysis were also used.
resultsA confirmatory factor analysis indicated a poor fit for both the original 4-factor UTAUT model and the extended version. An exploratory factor analysis was then conducted, resulting in a more satisfactory 5-factor model after removing 1 item with a factor loading <.40. Internal consistency of the 5 factors ranged from acceptable to good (Cronbach α=.76-.85). Collectively, all factors predicted the intention to use eHealth in 2018 (R
conclusionsThe findings from 2 cross-sectional studies conducted in 2018 and 2021, using an extended UTAUT model, gave a deeper understanding of eHealth acceptance among health care professionals who work with people with ID.
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.