CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 41Technology Adoption and User BehaviourInnovations in Medical EducationTechnology Use by Older Adults

Technology Acceptance Model in medical education: Systematic review

Open access
Lee, Jason Wen Yau, Tan, Jenelle Yingni, Bello, Fernando·2025·JMIR Medical Education
DOI 10.2196/67873PMC PMC12285687
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background: With the growing use of technology in medical education, a framework is needed to evaluate learners’ and educators’ acceptance of these technologies. In this context, the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) offers a valuable theoretical framework, providing insights into the determinants influencing users’ acceptance and adoption of technology. Objective: This review aims to systematically synthesize the body of research in medical education that uses the TAM. Methods: An electronic literature search was conducted using the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) approach in February 2024 on the Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed, and Web of Science databases, yielding 680 articles. Upon elimination of duplicates and applying the exclusion criteria, a total of 39 articles were retained. To evaluate the quality of the study, the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument score was calculated for each analysis with a qualitative component. Results: Studies using TAM in medical education began in 2010, with the model’s application relatively rare up to 2016. Most of the studies were quantitative, operationalizing the TAM as a survey instrument, but it was also used as a research framework in qualitative data analysis. Structural equation modeling, descriptive analysis, and correlation analysis were the most common data analysis approaches in the studies. E-learning and mobile learning were the predominant learning interventions explored, but there were indications that novel learning technologies such as augmented reality, virtual reality, and 3D printing were being investigated. Conclusions: The study’s findings reveal an expanding scholarly engagement with using TAM in medical education. Although the TAM has been mostly used as a survey instrument, it can also be adapted as a qualitative research framework to analyze data. This systematic review provides a foundation for future research to understand the factors influencing users’ acceptance of technology, especially in medical education.

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 · 10.2196/67873

Cites

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.

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

Cited by 41

Research works printed but not linked: 70

  1. [4]Johnson EO Charchanti AV Troupis TG Modernization of an anatomy class: from conceptualization to implementation. A case for integrated multimodal-multidisciplinary teaching Anat Sci Educ 2012 5 6 354 366 doi 10.1002/ase.1296 Medline 22730175 · DOI
  2. [5]Birbara NS Sammut C Pather N Virtual reality in anatomy: a pilot study evaluating different delivery modalities Anat Sci Educ 07 2020 13 4 445 457 doi 10.1002/ase.1921 Medline 31587471 · DOI
  3. [6]Duncan-Vaidya EA Stevenson EL The effectiveness of an augmented reality head-mounted display in learning skull anatomy at a community college Anat Sci Educ Mar 2021 14 2 221 231 doi 10.1002/ase.1998 Medline 32583577 · DOI
  4. [7]Adams JW Paxton L Dawes K Burlak K Quayle M McMenamin PG 3D printed reproductions of orbital dissections: a novel mode of visualising anatomy for trainees in ophthalmology or optometry Br J Ophthalmol Sep 2015 99 9 1162 1167 doi 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2014-306189 Medline 25689987 · DOI
  5. [8]Lee JWY Ong DW Soh RCC Rao JP Bello F Exploring student acceptance of learning technologies in anatomy education: a mixed-method approach Clin Anat Apr 2025 38 3 334 346 doi 10.1002/ca.24254 Medline 39673302 · DOI
  6. [9]Baptiste YM Digital feast and physical famine: the altered ecosystem of anatomy education due to the Covid-19 pandemic Anat Sci Educ 07 2021 14 4 399 407 doi 10.1002/ase.2098 Medline 33961346 PMC8239895 · DOI
  7. [10]Do DH Lakhal S Bernier M Bisson J Bergeron L St-Onge C Drivers of iPad use by undergraduate medical students: the Technology Acceptance Model perspective BMC Med Educ Feb 8 2022 22 1 87 doi 10.1186/s12909-022-03152-w Medline 35135525 PMC8827188 · DOI
  8. [11]Baghcheghi N Koohestani H Karimy M Alizadeh S Factors affecting mobile learning adoption in healthcare professional students based on technology acceptance model Acta fac medic Naissensis 2020 37 2 191 200 doi 10.5937/afmnai2002191B · DOI
  9. [12]Briz-Ponce L García-Peñalvo FJ An empirical assessment of a Technology Acceptance Model for apps in medical education J Med Syst Nov 2015 39 11 176 doi 10.1007/s10916-015-0352-x Medline 26411928 · DOI
  10. [13]Venkatesh V Davis FD A theoretical extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: four longitudinal field studies Manage Sci Feb 2000 46 2 186 204 doi 10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926 · DOI · Paper page
  11. [14]Papapanou M Routsi E Tsamakis K et al Medical education challenges and innovations during COVID-19 pandemic Postgrad Med J 05 2022 98 1159 321 327 doi 10.1136/postgradmedj-2021-140032 Medline 33782202 · DOI
  12. [15]Gagnon MP Ngangue P Payne-Gagnon J Desmartis M m-Health adoption by healthcare professionals: a systematic review J Am Med Inform Assoc 01 2016 23 1 212 220 doi 10.1093/jamia/ocv052 Medline 26078410 PMC7814918 · DOI · Paper page
  13. [16]Rahimi B Nadri H Lotfnezhad Afshar H Timpka T A systematic review of the Technology Acceptance Model in health informatics Appl Clin Inform 07 2018 9 3 604 634 doi 10.1055/s-0038-1668091 Medline 30112741 PMC6094026 · DOI · Paper page
  14. [17]Barteit S Neuhann F Bärnighausen T et al Technology acceptance and information system success of a mobile electronic platform for nonphysician clinical students in Zambia: prospective, nonrandomized intervention study J Med Internet Res Oct 9 2019 21 10 e14748 doi 10.2196/14748 Medline 31599731 PMC6914109 · DOI
  15. [18]AlQudah AA Al-Emran M Shaalan K Technology acceptance in healthcare: a systematic review Appl Sci (Basel) 01 2021 11 22 10537 doi 10.3390/app112210537 · DOI
  16. [19]Moher D Liberati A Tetzlaff J Altman DG PRISMA Group Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement BMJ 07 21 2009 339 jul21 1 b2535 doi 10.1136/bmj.b2535 Medline 19622551 PMC2714657 · DOI · Paper page
  17. [20]Davis FD Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology MIS Q Sep 1989 13 3 319 doi 10.2307/249008 · DOI · Paper page
  18. [22]Wong G Greenhalgh T Pawson R Internet-based medical education: a realist review of what works, for whom and in what circumstances BMC Med Educ Feb 2 2010 10 1 12 doi 10.1186/1472-6920-10-12 Medline 20122253 PMC2825237 · DOI
  19. [23]McGowan BS Wasko M Vartabedian BS Miller RS Freiherr DD Abdolrasulnia M Understanding the factors that influence the adoption and meaningful use of social media by physicians to share medical information J Med Internet Res Sep 24 2012 14 5 e117 doi 10.2196/jmir.2138 Medline 23006336 PMC3510763 · DOI
  20. [24]Knight JF Acceptability of video games technology for medical emergency training Int J Gaming Comput Mediat Simul Oct 2013 5 4 86 99 doi 10.4018/ijgcms.2013100105 · DOI
  21. [25]Fang TY Wang PC Liu CH Su MC Yeh SC Evaluation of a haptics-based virtual reality temporal bone simulator for anatomy and surgery training Comput Methods Programs Biomed Feb 2014 113 2 674 681 doi 10.1016/j.cmpb.2013.11.005 Medline 24280627 · DOI
  22. [26]Ryan JR Chen T Nakaji P Frakes DH Gonzalez LF Ventriculostomy simulation using patient-specific ventricular anatomy, 3D printing, and hydrogel casting World Neurosurg Nov 2015 84 5 1333 1339 doi 10.1016/j.wneu.2015.06.016 Medline 26100167 · DOI
  23. [27]Huang HM Liaw SS Lai CM Exploring learner acceptance of the use of virtual reality in medical education: a case study of desktop and projection-based display systems Interactive Learning Environments 01 2 2016 24 1 3 19 doi 10.1080/10494820.2013.817436 · DOI
  24. [28]Briz-Ponce L Pereira A Carvalho L Juanes-Méndez JA García-Peñalvo FJ Learning with mobile technologies – students’ behavior Comput Human Behav 07 2017 72 612 620 doi 10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.027 · DOI
  25. [29]Tahamtan I Pajouhanfar S Sedghi S Azad M Roudbari M Factors affecting smartphone adoption for accessing information in medical settings Health Info Libraries J Jun 2017 34 2 134 145 doi 10.1111/hir.12174 28406547 · DOI
  26. [30]Yeom S Choi-Lundberg DL Fluck AE Sale A Factors influencing undergraduate students’ acceptance of a haptic interface for learning gross anatomy ITSE Apr 18 2017 14 1 50 66 doi 10.1108/ITSE-02-2016-0006 · DOI
  27. [31]Basoglu N Goken M Dabic M Ozdemir Gungor D Daim TU Exploring adoption of augmented reality smart glasses: applications in the medical industry Front Eng 2018 0 0 doi 10.15302/J-FEM-2018056 · DOI
  28. [32]Duch Christensen M Oestergaard D Dieckmann P Watterson L Learners’ perceptions during simulation-based training: an interview study comparing remote versus locally facilitated simulation-based training Simul Healthc Oct 2018 13 5 306 315 doi 10.1097/SIH.0000000000000300 Medline 29620704 · DOI
  29. [33]Chan KS Zary N Applications and challenges of implementing artificial intelligence in medical education: integrative review JMIR Med Educ Jun 15 2019 5 1 e13930 doi 10.2196/13930 Medline 31199295 PMC6598417 · DOI · Paper page
  30. [34]Johnson EM Howard C A library mobile device deployment to enhance the medical student experience in a rural longitudinal integrated clerkship J Med Libr Assoc 01 2019 107 1 30 42 doi 10.5195/jmla.2019.442 Medline 30598646 PMC6300226 · DOI
  31. [35]Abdekhoda M Maserat E Ranjbaran F A conceptual model of flipped classroom adoption in medical higher education ITSE Mar 14 2020 17 4 393 401 doi 10.1108/ITSE-09-2019-0058 · DOI
  32. [36]Kucuk S Baydas Onlu O Kapakin S A model for medical students’ behavioral intention to use mobile learning J Med Educ Curric Dev 2020 7 2382120520973222 doi 10.1177/2382120520973222 Medline 33313399 PMC7716062 · DOI
  33. [37]Lee CW Chen GL Lee YK User experience evaluation of the EPAs-based e-portfolio system and an analysis of its impact J Acute Med Sep 1 2020 10 3 115 125 doi 10.6705/j.jacme.202009_10(3).0003 Medline 33209570 PMC7662102 · DOI
  34. [38]Jeyakumar T Ambata-Villanueva S McClure S Henderson C Wiljer D Best practices for the implementation and sustainment of virtual health information system training: qualitative study JMIR Med Educ Oct 22 2021 7 4 e30613 doi 10.2196/30613 Medline 34449402 PMC8544731 · DOI
  35. [39]Lee SS Tay SM Balakrishnan A Yeo SP Samarasekera DD Mobile learning in clinical settings: unveiling the paradox Korean J Med Educ Dec 2021 33 4 349 367 doi 10.3946/kjme.2021.204 Medline 34875152 PMC8655354 · DOI
  36. [40]Zalat MM Hamed MS Bolbol SA The experiences, challenges, and acceptance of e-learning as a tool for teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic among university medical staff Hwang GJ PLoS One 2021 16 3 e0248758 doi 10.1371/journal.pone.0248758 Medline 33770079 PMC7997029 · DOI
  37. [41]Almarzouqi A Aburayya A Salloum SA Prediction of user’s intention to use metaverse system in medical education: a hybrid SEM-ML learning approach IEEE Access 2022 10 43421 43434 doi 10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3169285 · DOI
  38. [42]Bhardwaj M Kashyap S Aggarwal D Bhawani R Perceptions and experience of medical students regarding e-learning during COVID-19 lockdown- a cross-sectional study JCDR 2022 doi 10.7860/JCDR/2022/54803.16051 · DOI
  39. [43]Bianchi I Stefani CJM Santiago P Zanatta AL Rieder R AnemiaAR: a serious game to support teaching of haematology J Vis Commun Med 07 2022 45 3 134 153 doi 10.1080/17453054.2021.2021798 Medline 35129054 · DOI
  40. [44]Chan E Khong ML Torda A Tanner JA Velan GM Wong GTC Medical teachers’ experience of emergency remote teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-institutional study BMC Med Educ Apr 21 2022 22 1 303 doi 10.1186/s12909-022-03367-x Medline 35449047 PMC9021818 · DOI
  41. [45]Harmon DJ Burgoon JM Kalmar EL Development and assessment of an integrated anatomy mobile app Clin Anat 07 2022 35 5 686 696 doi 10.1002/ca.23895 Medline 35452135 · DOI
  42. [46]Komuhangi A Mpirirwe H Robert L Githinji FW Nanyonga RC Predictors for adoption of e-learning among health professional students during the COVID-19 lockdown in a private university in Uganda BMC Med Educ Sep 10 2022 22 1 671 doi 10.1186/s12909-022-03735-7 Medline 36088322 PMC9463679 · DOI
  43. [47]Lau KHV Greer DM Using technology adoption theories to maximize the uptake of e-learning in medical education Med Sci Educ Apr 2022 32 2 545 552 doi 10.1007/s40670-022-01528-7 Medline 35261814 PMC8895110 · DOI
  44. [48]Bugli D Dick L Wingate KC et al Training the public health emergency response workforce: a mixed-methods approach to evaluating the virtual reality modality BMJ Open 05 9 2023 13 5 e063527 doi 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-063527 Medline 37160399 PMC10173982 · DOI
  45. [49]Young Y Leedham-Green K Jensen-Martin J Improving transitions between clinical placements Clin Teach Aug 2023 20 4 e13580 doi 10.1111/tct.13580 Medline 37146063 · DOI
  46. [50]Sallam M Salim NA Barakat M et al Assessing health students’ attitudes and usage of ChatGPT in Jordan: validation study JMIR Med Educ Sep 5 2023 9 1 e48254 doi 10.2196/48254 Medline 37578934 PMC10509747 · DOI · Paper page
  47. [51]Cabero-Almenara J Llorente-Cejudo C Palacios-Rodríguez A Gallego-Pérez Ó Degree of acceptance of virtual reality by health sciences students Int J Environ Res Public Health Apr 18 2023 20 8 5571 doi 10.3390/ijerph20085571 Medline 37107853 PMC10139036 · DOI
  48. [52]Ndlovu K Stein N Gaopelo R et al Evaluating the feasibility and acceptance of a mobile clinical decision support system in a resource-limited country: exploratory study JMIR Form Res Oct 10 2023 7 e48946 doi 10.2196/48946 Medline 37815861 PMC10599284 · DOI
  49. [53]Lin CW Clinciu DL Salcedo D Huang CW Kang EYN Li YCJ Crowdsource authoring as a tool for enhancing the quality of competency assessments in healthcare professions PLoS One 2023 18 11 e0278571 doi 10.1371/journal.pone.0278571 Medline 37917751 PMC10621860 · DOI
  50. [54]Rahadiani P Kekalih A Krisnamurti DGB Use of H5P interactive learning content in a self-paced MOOC for learning activity preferences and acceptance in an Indonesian medical elective module African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development Nov 10 2023 15 7 844 851 doi 10.1080/20421338.2023.2209482 · DOI
  51. [55]De Ruyck O Embo M Morton J et al A comparison of three feedback formats in an ePortfolio to support workplace learning in healthcare education: a mixed method study Educ Inf Technol Jun 2024 29 8 9667 9688 doi 10.1007/s10639-023-12062-3 · DOI
  52. [56]Reed DA Cook DA Beckman TJ Levine RB Kern DE Wright SM Association between funding and quality of published medical education research JAMA Sep 5 2007 298 9 1002 1009 doi 10.1001/jama.298.9.1002 Medline 17785645 · DOI
  53. [57]Smith RP Learman LA A plea for MERSQI: the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument Obstet Gynecol Oct 2017 130 4 686 690 doi 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002091 Medline 28885409 · DOI
  54. [58]Rosli MS Saleh NS Md. Ali A Abu Bakar S Mohd Tahir L A systematic review of the Technology Acceptance Model for the sustainability of higher education during the COVID-19 pandemic and identified research gaps Sustainability Sep 10 2022 14 18 11389 doi 10.3390/su141811389 · DOI · Paper page
  55. [59]Al-Emran M Mezhuyev V Kamaludin A Technology Acceptance Model in M-learning context: a systematic review Comput Educ Oct 2018 125 389 412 doi 10.1016/j.compedu.2018.06.008 · DOI
  56. [60]Buja LM Medical education today: all that glitters is not gold BMC Med Educ Apr 16 2019 19 1 110 doi 10.1186/s12909-019-1535-9 Medline 30991988 PMC6469033 · DOI
  57. [61]Goh PS Sandars J A vision of the use of technology in medical education after the COVID-19 pandemic MedEdPublish (2016) 2020 9 49 doi 10.15694/mep.2020.000049.1 Medline 38058893 PMC10697445 · DOI · Paper page
  58. [62]Kaul V Gallo de Moraes A Khateeb D et al Medical education during the COVID-19 pandemic Chest 05 2021 159 5 1949 1960 doi 10.1016/j.chest.2020.12.026 Medline 33385380 PMC7772576 · DOI
  59. [63]Vallée A Blacher J Cariou A Sorbets E Blended learning compared to traditional learning in medical education: systematic review and meta-analysis J Med Internet Res Aug 10 2020 22 8 e16504 doi 10.2196/16504 Medline 32773378 PMC7445617 · DOI
  60. [64]Gray JA DiLoreto M The effects of student engagement, student satisfaction, and perceived learning in online learning environments International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation 2016 URL https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1103654 Accessed 19-06-2025
  61. [65]Lim J Impact of instructors’ online teaching readiness on satisfaction in the emergency online teaching context Educ Inf Technol (Dordr) 2023 28 4 4109 4126 doi 10.1007/s10639-022-11241-y Medline 36247026 PMC9554388 · DOI
  62. [66]Wu JH Tennyson RD Hsia TL A study of student satisfaction in a blended e-learning system environment Comput Educ Aug 2010 55 1 155 164 doi 10.1016/j.compedu.2009.12.012 · DOI
  63. [67]Reed DA Beckman TJ Wright SM Levine RB Kern DE Cook DA Predictive validity evidence for medical education research study quality instrument scores: quality of submissions to JGIM’s Medical Education Special Issue J Gen Intern Med 07 2008 23 7 903 907 doi 10.1007/s11606-008-0664-3 Medline 18612715 PMC2517948 · DOI
  64. [68]Reed DA Beckman TJ Wright SM An assessment of the methodologic quality of medical education research studies published in The American Journal of Surgery Am J Surg Sep 2009 198 3 442 444 doi 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2009.01.024 Medline 19716888 · DOI
  65. [69]Ajzen I The theory of planned behavior Organ Behav Hum Decis Process Dec 1991 50 2 179 211 doi 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T · DOI · Paper page
  66. [71]Hair JF Risher JJ Sarstedt M Ringle CM When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM EBR 01 14 2019 31 1 2 24 doi 10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203 · DOI · Paper page
  67. [72]Lim CP Trends in online learning and their implications for schools Educ Technol 2002 42 6 43 48 URL https://www.jstor.org/stable/44428792 Accessed 19-06-2025
  68. [73]Kumar A Kumar P Palvia SCJ Verma S Online education worldwide: current status and emerging trends Journal of Information Technology Case and Application Research 01 2 2017 19 1 3 9 doi 10.1080/15228053.2017.1294867 · DOI
  69. [74]Hogg ME Tam V Zenati M et al Mastery-based virtual reality robotic simulation curriculum: the first step toward operative robotic proficiency J Surg Educ 2017 74 3 477 485 doi 10.1016/j.jsurg.2016.10.015 Medline 27884677 · DOI
  70. [75]Küçük S Kapakin S Göktaş Y Learning anatomy via mobile augmented reality: effects on achievement and cognitive load Anat Sci Educ Oct 2016 9 5 411 421 doi 10.1002/ase.1603 Medline 26950521 · DOI

Authors
Lee, J. W. Y., Tan, J. Y., & Bello, F.
Affiliations
National University of Singapore (SG)
Corresponding author
Lee, Jason Wen Yau
ORCID
Venue
JMIR Medical Education
Publisher
JMIR Publications Inc.
Published
2025-07-16
Volume
11
Pages
e67873-e67873
ISSN
2369-3762 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.2196/67873
PMC
PMC12285687
OpenAlex
W4410304441
Cited by
41
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 35 · 2025: 6
FWCI
10.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • JMIR Medical Education (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Technology Use by Older Adults
Keywords
technology acceptance model, medical education, technology acceptance, online learning, mobile learning, augmented reality, virtual reality, 3D printing, educational technology adoption
MeSH terms
Education, Medical, Humans, Models, Educational, Educational Technology

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