CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 46Mobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsElectronic Health Records SystemsTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour

Clinicians’ Role in the Adoption of an Oncology Decision Support App in Europe and Its Implications for Organizational Practices: Qualitative Case Study

Open access
Jacob, Christine, Sanchez-Vazquez, Antonio, Ivory, Chris·2019·JMIR mHealth and uHealth
DOI 10.2196/13555PMC PMC6524456

Published version of a preprint

Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Despite the existence of adequate technological infrastructure and clearer policies, there are situations where users, mainly physicians, resist mobile health (mHealth) solutions. This is of particular concern, bearing in mind that several studies, both in developed and developing countries, showed that clinicians' adoption is the most influential factor in such solutions' success. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to focus on understanding clinicians' roles in the adoption of an oncology decision support app, the factors impacting this adoption, and its implications for organizational and social practices. METHODS: A qualitative case study of a decision support app in oncology, called ONCOassist, was conducted. The data were collected through 17 in-depth interviews with clinicians and nurses in the United Kingdom, Ireland, France, Italy, Spain, and Portugal. RESULTS: This case demonstrates the affordances and constraints of mHealth technology at the workplace, its implications for the organization of work, and clinicians' role in its constant development and adoption. The research findings confirmed that factors such as app operation and stability, ease of use, usefulness, cost, and portability play a major role in the adoption decision; however, other social factors such as endorsement, neutrality of the content, attitude toward technology, existing workload, and internal organizational politics are also reported as key determinants of clinicians' adoption. Interoperability and cultural views of mobile usage at work are the key workflow disadvantages, whereas higher efficiency and performance, sharpened practice, and location flexibility are the main workflow advantages. CONCLUSIONS: Several organizational implications emerged, suggesting the need for some actions such as fostering a work culture that embraces new technologies and the creation of new digital roles for clinicians both on the hospitals or clinics and on the development sides but also more collaboration between health care organizations and digital health providers to enable electronic medical record integration and solving of any interoperability issues. From a theoretical perspective, we also suggest the addition of a fourth step to Leonardi's methodological guidance that accounts for user engagement; embedding the users in the continuous design and development processes ensures the understanding of user-specific affordances that can then be made more obvious to other users and increase the potential of such tools to go beyond their technological features and have a higher impact on workflow and the organizing process.

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 · 10.2196/13555

Cites

59 of 59 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

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?

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

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [19]McPhee R Canary H Distanciation and Organizational Constitution 2013 European Group for Organizational Studies Conference 2013 Canada
  2. [29]Creswell J Poth C Five Qualitative Approaches to Inquiry: choosing among five approaches 2018 California SAGE

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Jacob, C., Sanchez-Vazquez, A., & Ivory, C.
Affiliations
  • FHNW University of Applied Sciences and Arts Northwestern Switzerland (CH)
  • Anglia Ruskin University (GB)
Corresponding author
Jacob, Christine
ORCID
Venue
JMIR mHealth and uHealth
Publisher
JMIR Publications Inc.
Published
2019-05-03
Volume
7
Issue
5
Pages
e13555
ISSN
2291-5222 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.2196/13555
PMC
PMC6524456
OpenAlex
W2933427387
Cited by
46
References
59
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 1
FWCI
6.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • JMIR mhealth and uhealth (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Anglia Ruskin Research Online (Anglia Ruskin University) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
Keywords
mobile health, clinical decision support, oncology, technology adoption, clinicians, nurses, organizational practices, workflow, interoperability, electronic health records, user engagement, digital health, health care organization, attitudes toward technology, workload
MeSH terms
Adult, Attitude of Health Personnel, Decision Support Techniques, Europe, Female, Health Personnel, Humans, Interviews as Topic, Male, Medical Oncology, Middle Aged, Case-Control Studies, Professional Role, Qualitative Research, Mobile Applications

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