Cited by 31Mobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourHealth, Technology, Consumer Behavior

Challenges for the adoption of ICT for diabetes self‐management in South Africa

Open access
Petersen, Fazlyn, Brown, Afeefa, Pather, Shaun, Tucker, William D.·2020·THE ELECTRONIC JOURNAL OF INFORMATION SYSTEMS IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES

Abstract

The increasing disease burden in developing countries inhibits the provision of quality care to citizens. However, the increased availability of information communication and technology (ICT) tools makes this a viable option for inclusion in primary health care. Even so, barriers are impeding the successful adoption and usage of ICT tools in health care contexts. This research focuses on one such context to identify the challenges and barriers for the adoption of ICT tools for diabetes self‐management in the Western Cape province of South Africa. The extended technology acceptance model (TAM) and four factors (educational, technological, economic, and sociocultural factors) were identified as a basis for investigation. Evidence was gathered from a sample of 131 diabetic patients using semistructured interviews. These factors, together with TAM constructs, explore how patients interact with ICT and their attitudes towards the use of ICT for diabetes self‐management. The results indicate that all four factors form barriers to ICT adoption for diabetes self‐management. These findings provide a basis to inform how future interventions at the primary health care level may be developed to overcome the identified barriers in efforts to integrate ICT tools into diabetic patients' daily self‐management routines.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/isd2.12113

Cites

58 of 58 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Petersen, F., Brown, A., Pather, S., & Tucker, W. D.
Affiliations
University of the Western Cape (ZA)
Corresponding author
Petersen, Fazlyn
Venue
THE ELECTRONIC JOURNAL OF INFORMATION SYSTEMS IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-08-15
Volume
86
Issue
5
ISSN
1681-4835 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2966987645
Cited by
31
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 1
FWCI
5.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries (publishedVersion)
  • UWC Research Repository (University of the Western Cape) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Research Foundation (116819)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Health, Technology, Consumer Behavior
Keywords
diabetes self-management, information and communication technologies, technology adoption barriers, technology acceptance model, primary care, patient attitudes, educational factors, economic factors, sociocultural factors, Western Cape

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review