Technology Acceptance of 2 mHealth Apps During an Observational Technology Evaluation Study: Qualitative Results of a Mixed Methods Study
Rattachement africain : de, gb, ie. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
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.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Technology Acceptance of 2 mHealth Apps During an Observational Technology Evaluation Study: Qualitative Results of a Mixed Methods Study
- Date Crossref
- 29/04/2026
- Éditeur
- JMIR Publications Inc.
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Où se fait cette recherche
-
Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
Saarland University Division of Surgery pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
George Huntington Institute pays non établi dans la noticeÉtablissement de santé
-
Newcastle University Translational and Clinical Research Institute pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
Leibniz Institute for Prevention Research and Epidemiology - BIPS pays non établi dans la noticeStructure de recherche
-
Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust pays non établi dans la noticeÉtablissement de santé
-
NIHR Newcastle Biomedical Research Centre pays non établi dans la noticeStructure de recherche
-
University of Münster Department of Clinical Radiology pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
Hertie Institute for Clinical Brain Research pays non établi dans la noticeInstitution
-
University College Cork Clinical Research Facility pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein Institute of General Practice pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
School of Computing OpenLab pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel, Division of Surgery — Saarland University et George Huntington Institute, avec 9 autres affiliations.
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.