Lee J-H. Future of the smartphone for patients and healthcare providers. Healthcare Inform Res. 2016;22(1):1–2.
Article
CAS
Google Scholar
Sherer S, Meyerhoefer C, Levick D. Challenges to aligning coordination technology with organizations, people, and processes in healthcare. In: Proceedings of the 50th Hawaii international conference on system sciences; 2017.
Google Scholar
Seyedi H, Mohebbifar R, Rafiei S. Quality management system and its role in the quality maturity of training hospitals. J Client-Centered Nursing Care. 2019;5(2):113–22.
Article
Google Scholar
Kohli R, Tan SS-L. Electronic health records: how can IS researchers contribute to transforming healthcare? MIS Q. 2016;40(3):553–73.
Article
Google Scholar
Sarre S, Maben J, Griffiths P, Chable R, Robert G. The 10-year impact of a ward-level quality improvement intervention in acute hospitals: a multiple methods study. Southampton: NIHR Journals Library, Health Services and Delivery Research. 2019;7(28).
Google Scholar
Abu-Dalbouh H. A proposed mhealth model for improving the quality care in hospitals. Res J Appl Sci Eng Technol. 2014;7(7):1401–5.
Article
Google Scholar
Rahurkar S, Vest JR, Menachemi N. Despite the spread of health information exchange, there is little evidence of its impact on cost, use, and quality of care. Health Aff. 2015;34(3):477–83.
Article
Google Scholar
Kumar S, Nilsen WJ, Abernethy A, Atienza A, Patrick K, Pavel M, et al. Mobile health technology evaluation: the mHealth evidence workshop. Am J Prev Med. 2013;45(2):228–36.
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Hall CS, Fottrell E, Wilkinson S, Byass P. Assessing the impact of mHealth interventions in low-and middle-income countries–what has been shown to work? Glob Health Action. 2014;7:25606.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Dick S, O’Connor Y, Heavin C. Approaches to Mobile health evaluation: a comparative study a mHealth evaluation comparison study. Inf Syst Manag. 2019;37:1–18.
Google Scholar
Boudreaux ED, Waring ME, Hayes RB, Sadasivam RS, Mullen S, Pagoto S. Evaluating and selecting mobile health apps: strategies for healthcare providers and healthcare organizations. Transl Behav Med. 2014;4(4):363–71.
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Keikhosrokiani P, Zakaria N, Mustaffa N, Venkat I. Study of the effective factors in Mobile health-care success: sociotechnical perspective. In: mHealth Multidisciplinary Verticals; 2014. p. 237.
Google Scholar
Anglada-Martinez H, Riu-Viladoms G, Martin-Conde M, Rovira-Illamola M, Sotoca-Momblona J, Codina-Jane C. Does mHealth increase adherence to medication? Results of a systematic review. Int J Clin Pract. 2015;69(1):9–32.
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Franz-Vasdeki J, Pratt BA, Newsome M, Germann S. Taking mHealth solutions to scale: enabling environments and successful implementation. J Mobile Technol Med. 2015;4(1):35–8.
Article
Google Scholar
Hamine S, Gerth-Guyette E, Faulx D, Green BB, Ginsburg AS. Impact of mHealth chronic disease management on treatment adherence and patient outcomes: a systematic review. J Med Internet Res. 2015;17(2):e52.
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Turner T, Spruijt-Metz D, Wen C, Hingle M. Prevention and treatment of pediatric obesity using mobile and wireless technologies: a systematic review. Pediatr Obes. 2015;10:403–9.
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Hsieh JP-A, Zmud R. Understanding post-Adtopive usage behaviors: a two-dimensional view. DIGIT 2006 proceedings; 2006.
Google Scholar
O’Connor Y, O’Reilly P. Examining the infusion of mobile technology by healthcare practitioners in a hospital setting. Inf Syst Front. 2018;20(6):1297–317.
Article
Google Scholar
Goodhue DL, Thompson RL. Task-technology fit and individual performance. MIS Q. 1995;19(2):213–36.
Article
Google Scholar
Serrano CI, Karahanna E. The compensatory interaction between user Capabiities and technology capabilities in influencing task performance: an empirical assessment in telemedicine consultations. MIS Q. 2016;40(3):597–621.
Article
Google Scholar
Sundin P, Callan J, Mehta K. Why do entrepreneurial mHealth ventures in the developing world fail to scale? J Med Eng Technol. 2016;40(7-8):1–14.
Article
Google Scholar
Varshney U. Mobile health: four emerging themes of research. Decis Support Syst. 2014;66(0):20–35.
Article
Google Scholar
Sun H, Fang Y, Zou HM. Choosing a fit technology: understanding mindfulness in technology adoption and continuance. J Assoc Inf Syst. 2016;17(6):377.
Google Scholar
Bhuyan S, Kim H, Isehunwa OO, Kumar N, Bhatt J, Wyant DK, et al. Privacy and security issues in mobile health: current research and future directions. In: Health policy and technology; 2017.
Google Scholar
Restuccia JD, Cohen AB, Horwitt JN, Shwartz M. Hospital implementation of health information technology and quality of care: are they related? BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2012;12(1):109.
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Miah SJ, Gammack J, Hasan N. Extending the framework for Mobile health information systems research: a content analysis. Inf Syst. 2017;69:1–24.
Article
Google Scholar
Cook VE, Ellis AK, Hildebrand KJ. Mobile health applications in clinical practice: pearls, pitfalls, and key considerations. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2016;117(2):143–9.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Donabedian A. Commentary on some studies of the quality of care. Health Care Financ Rev. 1987;SUPPL:75–85.
Google Scholar
Chang JT, Hays RD, Shekelle PG, MacLean CH, Solomon DH, Reuben DB, et al. Patients' global ratings of their health care are not associated with the technical quality of their care. Ann Intern Med. 2006;144(9):665–72.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Hanefeld J, Powell-Jackson T, Balabanova D. Understanding and measuring quality of care: dealing with complexity. Bull World Health Organ. 2017;95(5):368.
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Scott Morton MS. The corporation of the 1990s. Information technology and organizational transformation; 1991.
Google Scholar
Chatfield AT, Yetton P. Strategic payoff from EDI as a function of EDI embeddedness. J Manag Inf Syst. 2000;16(4):195–224.
Article
Google Scholar
Bensaou M, Venkatraman N. Inter-organizational relationships and information technology: a conceptual synthesis and a research framework. Eur J Inf Syst. 1996;5(2):84–91.
Article
Google Scholar
Doran D, Haynes BR, Estabrooks CA, Kushniruk A, Dubrowski A, Bajnok I, et al. The role of organizational context and individual nurse characteristics in explaining variation in use of information technologies in evidence based practice. Implement Sci. 2012;7(1):122.
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Chiasson M, Kelley H, Downey A. Understanding task-performance chain feed-forward and feedback relationships in E-health. AIS Transact Human-Comput Interact. 2015;7(3):167–90.
Article
Google Scholar
Furneaux B. Task-technology fit theory: a survey and synopsis of the literature. In: Dwivedi Y., Wade M., Schneberger S. (eds) Information Systems Theory. Integrated Series in Information Systems, vol 28. New York: Springer; 2012.
Kutney-Lee A, Sloane DM, Bowles KH, Burns LR, Aiken LH. Electronic health record adoption and nurse reports of usability and quality of care: the role of work environment. Appl Clin Inform. 2019;10(01):129–39.
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Abraham D. A grounded theory for the impacts of ubiquitous information systems (IS) access on task performance. Austin: Austin Mobility Roundtable; 2004.
Basole RC. The value and impact of mobile information and communication technologies. Atlanta: Proceedings of the 2004 International Federation of Automatic Control Symposium; 2004; 2004.
Google Scholar
Hsiao J-L, Chen R-F. An investigation on task-technology fit of Mobile nursing information Systems for Nursing Performance. Comput Inform Nurs. 2012;30(5):265–73.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Rossi M, Tuunainen VK, Pesonen M. Mobile technology in field customer service: big improvements with small changes. Bus Process Manag J. 2007;13(6):853–65.
Article
Google Scholar
Kim H-W, Chan HC, Lee S-H. A user commitment approach to information systems infusion: PACIS 2012 Proceedings; 2012. Paper 101. Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.
Thatcher JB, Wright RT, Sun H, Zagenczyk TJ, Klein R. Mindfulness in information technology use: definitions, distinctions, and a new measure. MIS Q. 2018;42(3):831–47.
Article
Google Scholar
McLean E, Sedera D, Tan F. Reconceptualizing system use for contemporary information systems. In: PACIS 2011 proceedings; 2011. p. 130.
Google Scholar
Oakley R, Palvia P. A study of the impact of Mobile self-efficacy and emotional attachment on Mobile device infusion. Seattle: AMCIS 2012; 2012. Paper 15.
Limayem M, Hirt SG. Force of habit and information systems usage: theory and initial validation. J Assoc Inf Syst. 2003;4(1):Article 3.
Google Scholar
Prgomet M, Georgiou A, Westbrook JI. The impact of mobile handheld technology on hospital physicians' work practices and patient care: a systematic review. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2009;16(6):792–801.
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Bell H, Garfield S, Khosla S, Patel C, Franklin BD. Mixed methods study of medication-related decision support alerts experienced during electronic prescribing for inpatients at an English hospital. Eur J Hosp Pharm. 2019;26(6):318–22.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Mans R, van der Aalst W, Russell N, Bakker P. Implementation of a healthcare process in four different workflow systems. Technical report. Eindhoven: Technische Universiteit Eindhoven; 2009.
Han S, Harkke V, Mustonen P, Seppanen M, Kallio M. Mobilizing medical information and knowledge: some insights from a survey. In: ECIS 2004 proceedings; 2004. p. Paper 69.
Google Scholar
Venkatesh V, Brown SA, Maruping LM, Bala H. Predicting different conceptualizations of system use: the competing roles of behavioral intention, facilitating conditions, and behavioral expectation. MIS Q. 2008;32(3):483–502.
Article
Google Scholar
Agarwal R, Venkatesh V. Assessing a firm’s web presence: a heuristic evaluation procedure for the measurement of usability. Inf Syst Res. 2002;13(2):168–86.
Article
Google Scholar
Cooper RB, Zmud RW. Information technology implementation research: a technological diffusion approach. Manag Sci. 1990;36(2):123–39.
Article
Google Scholar
Lewis W, Agarwal R, Sambamurthy V. Sources of influence on beliefs about information technology use: an empirical study of knowledge workers. MIS Q. 2003;27(4):657–78.
Article
Google Scholar
Tsai M-F, Hung S-Y, Yu W-J, Chen C, Yen DC. Understanding physicians’ adoption of electronic medical records: healthcare technology self-efficacy, service level and risk perspectives. Comput Stand Interfaces. 2019;66(103342).
Article
Google Scholar
Compeau DR, Higgins CA. Computer self-efficacy: development of a measure and initial test. MIS Q. 1995;19(2):189–211.
Article
Google Scholar
Shaw N, Manwani S. Extending feature usage: a study of the post-adoption of electronic medical records CIS 2011 proceedings; 2011. p. Paper 125.
Google Scholar
Bandura A. Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychol Rev. 1977;84(2):191–215.
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Stajkovic AD, Luthans F. Self-efficacy and work-related performance: a meta-analysis. Psychol Bull. 1988;124(2):240–61.
Article
Google Scholar
Vannatta R, Beyerbach B, Walsh C. From teaching technology to using technology to enhance student learning: preservice teachers’ changing perceptions of technology infusion. J Technol Teach Educ. 2001;9(1):105–27.
Google Scholar
Pongpattrachai D, Cragg P, Fisher R. Spreadsheet infusion in small audit firms in Thailand. In: Americas conference on information systems Paper; 2009. p. 432.
Google Scholar
Pierce JL, Kostova T, Dirks KT. The state of psychological ownership: integrating and extending a century of research. Rev Gen Psychol. 2003;7(1):84–107.
Article
Google Scholar
Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Lee J-Y, Podsakoff NP. Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J Appl Psychol. 2003;88(5):879.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Cunningham CT, Quan H, Hemmelgarn B, Noseworthy T, Beck CA, Dixon E, et al. Exploring physician specialist response rates to web-based surveys. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2015;15(1):32.
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Al-Janabi S, Alkaim AF. A nifty collaborative analysis to predicting a novel tool (DRFLLS) for missing values estimation. Soft Comput. 2019;24:555–69.
Article
Google Scholar
Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences ed. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, NJ; 1988.
Google Scholar
Tenenhaus M, Vinzi VE, Chatelin YM, Lauro C. PLS path modeling. Comput Stat Data Anal. 2005;48(1):159–205.
Article
Google Scholar
Diamantopoulos A, Siguaw JA. Formative versus reflective indicators in organizational measure development: a comparison and empirical illustration. Br J Manag. 2006;17(4):263–82.
Article
Google Scholar
Fornell C, Bookstein FL. Two structural equation models: LISREL and PLS applied to consumer exit-voice theory. J Market Res. 1982;19(4):440–52.
Article
Google Scholar
Henseler J, Ringle CM, Sinkovics RR. The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. Adv Int Mark. 2009;20(2009):277–319.
Article
Google Scholar
Andreev P, Heart T, Maoz H, Pliskin N. Validating formative partial least squares (PLS) models: methodological review and empirical illustration. Phoenix: ICIS 2009 Proceedings; 2009. p. 193.
Chatelin YM, Vinzi VE, Tenenhaus M. State-of-art on PLS path modeling through the available software. In: Les cahiers de Recherche. Paris: Groupe HEC; 2002. p. 764.
Gefen D, Straub DW, Boudreau M-C. Structural equation modeling and regression: guidelines for research and practice. CAIS. 2000;4(7):1–70.
Google Scholar
Chin WW. The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. In: G.E M, editor. Modern methods for business research Mahwah. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1998. p. 295–336.
Google Scholar
Hair JF Jr, Hult GTM, Ringle C, Sarstedt M. A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM): sage publications; 2016.
Google Scholar
Becker J-M, Klein K, Wetzels M. Hierarchical latent variable models in PLS-SEM: guidelines for using reflective-formative type models. Long Range Plann. 2012;45(5):359–94.
Article
Google Scholar
Ali SB, Romero J, Morrison K, Hafeez B, Ancker JS. Focus section health IT usability: applying a task-technology fit model to adapt an electronic patient portal for patient work. Appl Clin Inform. 2018;9(01):174–84.
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Dishaw M, Strong D, Bandy DB. Extending the task-technology fit model with self-efficacy constructs. In: AMCIS 2002 proceedings; 2002. p. 143.
Google Scholar
Lin T-C, Huang C-C. Understanding knowledge management system usage antecedents: an integration of social cognitive theory and task technology fit. Inf Manage. 2008;45(6):410–7.
Article
Google Scholar
Gagnon M-P, Ngangue P, Payne-Gagnon J, Desmartis M. M-health adoption by healthcare professionals: a systematic review. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2015;23(1):212–20.
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Murray E, Treweek S, Pope C, MacFarlane A, Ballini L, Dowrick C, et al. Normalisation process theory: a framework for developing, evaluating and implementing complex interventions. BMC Med. 2010;8(1):63.
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Beaudry A, Pinsonneault A. Advancing the theory of infusion: an appropriation model of the infusion process. Paris: Cahier du GreSI M, Canada; 1999.
Igbaria M, Iivari J. The effects of self-efficacy on computer usage. Omega. 1995;23(6):587–605.
Article
Google Scholar
Agarwal R, Karahanna E. Time flies when you're having fun: cognitive absorption and beliefs about information technology usage. MIS Q. 2000;24:665–94.
Article
Google Scholar
Jain V, Kanungo S. IS-enabled performance improvement at the individual level: evidence of complementarity. In: Proceedings of the 2006 ACM SIGMIS CPR conference on computer personnel research: forty four years of computer personnel research: achievements, challenges and the future. Claremont. 1125181: ACM; 2006. p. 25–33.
Google Scholar
Sun H. Understanding user revisions when using information system features: adaptive system use and triggers. MIS Q. 2012;36(2):453–78.
Article
Google Scholar
Honeybourne C, Sutton S, Ward L. Knowledge in the palm of your hands: PDAs in the clinical setting. Health Info Libr J. 2006;23(1):51–9.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Strong DM, Dishaw MT, Bandy DB. Extending task technology fit with computer self-efficacy. ACM SIGMIS Database. 2006;37(2–3):96–107.
Article
Google Scholar
Varshney U. A model for improving quality of decisions in mobile health. Decis Support Syst. 2014;62:66–77.
Article
Google Scholar
Wakefield RL, Whitten D. Mobile computing: a user study on hedonic/utilitarian mobile device usage. Eur J Inf Syst. 2006;15(3):292–300.
Article
Google Scholar