糖尿病患者对智能传感的接受程度、其决定因素以及促进接受的干预措施的效果:随机对照试验的结果。

IF 3.2 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Frontiers in digital health Pub Date : 2024-05-28 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fdgth.2024.1352762
Johannes Knauer, Harald Baumeister, Andreas Schmitt, Yannik Terhorst
{"title":"糖尿病患者对智能传感的接受程度、其决定因素以及促进接受的干预措施的效果:随机对照试验的结果。","authors":"Johannes Knauer, Harald Baumeister, Andreas Schmitt, Yannik Terhorst","doi":"10.3389/fdgth.2024.1352762","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Mental health problems are prevalent among people with diabetes, yet often under-diagnosed. Smart sensing, utilizing passively collected digital markers through digital devices, is an innovative diagnostic approach that can support mental health screening and intervention. However, the acceptance of this technology remains unclear. Grounded on the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT), this study aimed to investigate (1) the acceptance of smart sensing in a diabetes sample, (2) the determinants of acceptance, and (3) the effectiveness of an acceptance facilitating intervention (AFI).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of <i>N</i> = 132 participants with diabetes were randomized to an intervention group (IG) or a control group (CG). The IG received a video-based AFI on smart sensing and the CG received an educational video on mindfulness. Acceptance and its potential determinants were assessed through an online questionnaire as a single post-measurement. The self-reported behavioral intention, interest in using a smart sensing application and installation of a smart sensing application were assessed as outcomes. The data were analyzed using latent structural equation modeling and t-tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The acceptance of smart sensing at baseline was average (<i>M </i>= 12.64, <i>SD </i>= 4.24) with 27.8% showing low, 40.3% moderate, and 31.9% high acceptance. Performance expectancy (<i>γ </i>= 0.64, <i>p </i>< 0.001), social influence (<i>γ </i>= 0.23, <i>p </i>= .032) and trust (<i>γ </i>= 0.27, <i>p </i>= .040) were identified as potential determinants of acceptance, explaining 84% of the variance. SEM model fit was acceptable (RMSEA = 0.073, SRMR = 0.059). The intervention did not significantly impact acceptance (<i>γ </i>= 0.25, 95%-CI: -0.16-0.65, <i>p </i>= .233), interest (OR<i> </i>= 0.76, 95% CI: 0.38-1.52, <i>p </i>= .445) or app installation rates (OR<i> </i>= 1.13, 95% CI: 0.47-2.73, <i>p </i>= .777).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The high variance in acceptance supports a need for acceptance facilitating procedures. The analyzed model supported performance expectancy, social influence, and trust as potential determinants of smart sensing acceptance; perceived benefit was the most influential factor towards acceptance. The AFI was not significant. Future research should further explore factors contributing to smart sensing acceptance and address implementation barriers.</p>","PeriodicalId":73078,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in digital health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11165071/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Acceptance of smart sensing, its determinants, and the efficacy of an acceptance-facilitating intervention in people with diabetes: results from a randomized controlled trial.\",\"authors\":\"Johannes Knauer, Harald Baumeister, Andreas Schmitt, Yannik Terhorst\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fdgth.2024.1352762\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Mental health problems are prevalent among people with diabetes, yet often under-diagnosed. Smart sensing, utilizing passively collected digital markers through digital devices, is an innovative diagnostic approach that can support mental health screening and intervention. However, the acceptance of this technology remains unclear. Grounded on the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT), this study aimed to investigate (1) the acceptance of smart sensing in a diabetes sample, (2) the determinants of acceptance, and (3) the effectiveness of an acceptance facilitating intervention (AFI).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of <i>N</i> = 132 participants with diabetes were randomized to an intervention group (IG) or a control group (CG). The IG received a video-based AFI on smart sensing and the CG received an educational video on mindfulness. Acceptance and its potential determinants were assessed through an online questionnaire as a single post-measurement. The self-reported behavioral intention, interest in using a smart sensing application and installation of a smart sensing application were assessed as outcomes. The data were analyzed using latent structural equation modeling and t-tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The acceptance of smart sensing at baseline was average (<i>M </i>= 12.64, <i>SD </i>= 4.24) with 27.8% showing low, 40.3% moderate, and 31.9% high acceptance. Performance expectancy (<i>γ </i>= 0.64, <i>p </i>< 0.001), social influence (<i>γ </i>= 0.23, <i>p </i>= .032) and trust (<i>γ </i>= 0.27, <i>p </i>= .040) were identified as potential determinants of acceptance, explaining 84% of the variance. SEM model fit was acceptable (RMSEA = 0.073, SRMR = 0.059). The intervention did not significantly impact acceptance (<i>γ </i>= 0.25, 95%-CI: -0.16-0.65, <i>p </i>= .233), interest (OR<i> </i>= 0.76, 95% CI: 0.38-1.52, <i>p </i>= .445) or app installation rates (OR<i> </i>= 1.13, 95% CI: 0.47-2.73, <i>p </i>= .777).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The high variance in acceptance supports a need for acceptance facilitating procedures. The analyzed model supported performance expectancy, social influence, and trust as potential determinants of smart sensing acceptance; perceived benefit was the most influential factor towards acceptance. The AFI was not significant. Future research should further explore factors contributing to smart sensing acceptance and address implementation barriers.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73078,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in digital health\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11165071/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in digital health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fdgth.2024.1352762\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in digital health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fdgth.2024.1352762","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:心理健康问题在糖尿病患者中很普遍,但往往诊断不足。智能传感通过数字设备被动收集数字标记,是一种创新的诊断方法,可为心理健康筛查和干预提供支持。然而,人们对这项技术的接受程度仍不明确。本研究以技术接受和使用统一理论(UTAUT)为基础,旨在调查(1)糖尿病样本对智能传感的接受程度;(2)接受的决定因素;(3)促进接受的干预措施(AFI)的有效性:共有 N = 132 名糖尿病患者被随机分配到干预组(IG)或对照组(CG)。干预组接受基于视频的智能感知 AFI,对照组接受正念教育视频。接受度及其潜在决定因素通过在线问卷进行评估,作为单一的后期测量。自我报告的行为意向、使用智能传感应用的兴趣和智能传感应用的安装情况作为结果进行评估。采用潜在结构方程模型和 t 检验对数据进行了分析:基线时对智能传感的接受度为平均值(M = 12.64,SD = 4.24),其中 27.8%为低接受度,40.3%为中接受度,31.9%为高接受度。绩效预期(γ = 0.64,p γ = 0.23,p = .032)和信任(γ = 0.27,p = .040)被认为是接受度的潜在决定因素,解释了 84% 的方差。SEM 模型的拟合度是可以接受的(RMSEA = 0.073,SRMR = 0.059)。干预对接受度(γ = 0.25,95%-CI:-0.16-0.65,p = .233)、兴趣(OR = 0.76,95% CI:0.38-1.52,p = .445)或应用程序安装率(OR = 1.13,95% CI:0.47-2.73,p = .777)没有明显影响:讨论:接受度的高差异支持了对接受度促进程序的需求。分析模型支持将性能预期、社会影响和信任作为智能传感接受度的潜在决定因素;感知利益是对接受度影响最大的因素。AFI并不重要。未来的研究应进一步探讨智能传感的接受因素,并解决实施障碍。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Acceptance of smart sensing, its determinants, and the efficacy of an acceptance-facilitating intervention in people with diabetes: results from a randomized controlled trial.

Background: Mental health problems are prevalent among people with diabetes, yet often under-diagnosed. Smart sensing, utilizing passively collected digital markers through digital devices, is an innovative diagnostic approach that can support mental health screening and intervention. However, the acceptance of this technology remains unclear. Grounded on the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT), this study aimed to investigate (1) the acceptance of smart sensing in a diabetes sample, (2) the determinants of acceptance, and (3) the effectiveness of an acceptance facilitating intervention (AFI).

Methods: A total of N = 132 participants with diabetes were randomized to an intervention group (IG) or a control group (CG). The IG received a video-based AFI on smart sensing and the CG received an educational video on mindfulness. Acceptance and its potential determinants were assessed through an online questionnaire as a single post-measurement. The self-reported behavioral intention, interest in using a smart sensing application and installation of a smart sensing application were assessed as outcomes. The data were analyzed using latent structural equation modeling and t-tests.

Results: The acceptance of smart sensing at baseline was average (M = 12.64, SD = 4.24) with 27.8% showing low, 40.3% moderate, and 31.9% high acceptance. Performance expectancy (γ = 0.64, p < 0.001), social influence (γ = 0.23, p = .032) and trust (γ = 0.27, p = .040) were identified as potential determinants of acceptance, explaining 84% of the variance. SEM model fit was acceptable (RMSEA = 0.073, SRMR = 0.059). The intervention did not significantly impact acceptance (γ = 0.25, 95%-CI: -0.16-0.65, p = .233), interest (OR= 0.76, 95% CI: 0.38-1.52, p = .445) or app installation rates (OR= 1.13, 95% CI: 0.47-2.73, p = .777).

Discussion: The high variance in acceptance supports a need for acceptance facilitating procedures. The analyzed model supported performance expectancy, social influence, and trust as potential determinants of smart sensing acceptance; perceived benefit was the most influential factor towards acceptance. The AFI was not significant. Future research should further explore factors contributing to smart sensing acceptance and address implementation barriers.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊最新文献
Accessing medical care in the era of the digital revolution: arguing the case for the "digitally marginalised". Biofuser: a multi-source data fusion platform for fusing the data of fermentation process devices. Cost-effectiveness of digital interventions for mental health: current evidence, common misconceptions, and future directions. Innovative mobile app solution for facial nerve rehabilitation: a usability analysis. Statistical refinement of patient-centered case vignettes for digital health research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1