Cited by 373Technology Adoption and User BehaviourMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsHealth, Technology, Consumer Behavior

Understanding consumer acceptance of healthcare wearable devices: An integrated model of UTAUT and TTF

Wang, Hailiang, Tao, Da, Yu, Na, Qu, Xingda·2020·International Journal of Medical Informatics

Abstract

Background Healthcare wearable devices (HWDs) enable continuous monitoring of consumers' health signals and have great potential to improve the efficiency and quality of healthcare. However, factors influencing consumer acceptance of HWDs are not well understood. Moreover, extant studies seem to fail to consider whether an HWD has appropriate functions to fit the requirements of consumers' healthcare activities. Objectives The objective of this study was to develop and empirically test a model by integrating the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Usage of Technology (UTAUT) and Task-Technology Fit (TTF) models to understand how consumers accept HWDs. Methods A self-administered questionnaire was designed based on validated measurement scales. Data from 406 valid samples were analyzed using partial least squares structural equation modeling. Results The results indicated that performance expectancy, effort expectancy, facilitating conditions, social influence, and task-technology fit positively affected consumers' behavioral intention to use HWDs, and together accounted for 68.0 % of its variance. Both task and technology characteristics were significant determinants of task-technology fit and exerted impacts on behavioral intention through the mediating roles of task-technology fit and effort expectancy. Conclusions The key findings showed that consumer acceptance of HWDs was affected by both users' perceptions (i.e., performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence and facilitating conditions) and the task-technology fit. The theoretical and practical implications and contributions were provided for future researchers and practitioners to increase consumers' use of HWDs in their healthcare activities.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2020.104156

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 95 · Cited by 373

Authors
Wang, H., Tao, D., Yu, N., & Qu, X.
Affiliations
  • Shenzhen University (CN)
  • Nanjing Forestry University (CN)
Corresponding author
Tao, Da
Venue
International Journal of Medical Informatics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-07
Volume
139
Pages
104156
ISSN
1386-5056 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3018519746
Cited by
373
References
95
Citations by year
2026: 54 · 2025: 57 · 2024: 93 · 2023: 61 · 2022: 58 · 2021: 39 · 2020: 11
FWCI
41.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Medical Informatics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province, China (2019A1515010863)
  • Humanity and Social Science Youth foundation of Ministry of Education of China (20YJCZH146)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Health, Technology, Consumer Behavior
Keywords
consumer acceptance, UTAUT, task-technology fit, behavioral intention, performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, facilitating conditions, health monitoring, technology adoption
MeSH terms
Wearable Electronic Devices, Adolescent, Adult, Consumer Behavior, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Models, Psychological, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Surveys and Questionnaires, Biomedical Technology, Intention, Young Adult

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