JMIR human factors · 2026
Technology Acceptance of 2 mHealth Apps During an Observational Technology Evaluation Study: Qualitative Results of a Mixed Methods Study.
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Graeber Johanna, Warmerdam Elke, Aufenberg Svenja, Bull Christopher, Davies Kristen, Döhring Juliane, Emmert Kirsten, Judd Claire, Maetzler Corina, Manyakov Nikolay V, Reilmann Ralf, Ng Wan-Fai, Macrae Victoria, Maetzler Walter, Kaduszkiewicz Hanna
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Mobile health (mHealth) apps are useful tools for research and disease management. However, implementation of mHealth apps is lacking in many areas. While mHealth apps offer various advantages to researchers and patients, their effectiveness depends on their actual use. Barriers to using mHealth apps are often due to human factors such as usability or technology acceptance. Although prior studies have examined the acceptance of mHealth apps in patient treatment, the key factors driving or hindering the use of mHealth apps in research remain unclear.
OBJECTIVE: This study explores user perceptions of 2 mHealth apps in the setting of an observational technology evaluation study using the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. We aim to evaluate the technology acceptance of these specific apps and to investigate challenges in choosing suitable mHealth apps in research. The apps were intended for data collection; no effect on health was expected.
METHODS: Patients with chronic diseases as well as healthy participants used a symptom tracking app and a cognitive test app over the course of 4 weeks within the feasibility study of the project "Identifying Digital Endpoints to Assess Fatigue, Sleep and Activities of Daily Living in Neurodegenerative Disorders and Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases." Thereafter, 61 qualitative interviews were conducted, recorded, and transcribed. A qualitative content analysis using the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology was performed.
RESULTS: An important aspect of motivation for participants was feedback on their health data and performance in the cognitive tests. Effort played a significant role in app use. Patients rated the apps as easy to use and quick. Using the app multiple times per day at fixed times was perceived as disruptive. Participants preferred using their own phone. Social influence as well as facilitating conditions played a lesser role in intention to use the apps. Data security was no concern for most participants. They stressed the importance of good relations with the study team.
CONCLUSIONS: In choosing suitable apps, one size will certainly not fit all. For medical research, pretesting of all materials with the potential users is of utmost importance. If the positive effects of the app on users' health are not immediately apparent, other factors may motivate use, for example, feedback, gamification, adjustable functions, applicability on all smartphone operating systems, and good relations to the study team.
OBJECTIVE: This study explores user perceptions of 2 mHealth apps in the setting of an observational technology evaluation study using the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. We aim to evaluate the technology acceptance of these specific apps and to investigate challenges in choosing suitable mHealth apps in research. The apps were intended for data collection; no effect on health was expected.
METHODS: Patients with chronic diseases as well as healthy participants used a symptom tracking app and a cognitive test app over the course of 4 weeks within the feasibility study of the project "Identifying Digital Endpoints to Assess Fatigue, Sleep and Activities of Daily Living in Neurodegenerative Disorders and Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases." Thereafter, 61 qualitative interviews were conducted, recorded, and transcribed. A qualitative content analysis using the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology was performed.
RESULTS: An important aspect of motivation for participants was feedback on their health data and performance in the cognitive tests. Effort played a significant role in app use. Patients rated the apps as easy to use and quick. Using the app multiple times per day at fixed times was perceived as disruptive. Participants preferred using their own phone. Social influence as well as facilitating conditions played a lesser role in intention to use the apps. Data security was no concern for most participants. They stressed the importance of good relations with the study team.
CONCLUSIONS: In choosing suitable apps, one size will certainly not fit all. For medical research, pretesting of all materials with the potential users is of utmost importance. If the positive effects of the app on users' health are not immediately apparent, other factors may motivate use, for example, feedback, gamification, adjustable functions, applicability on all smartphone operating systems, and good relations to the study team.