Content uploaded by Hussain Abu-Dalbouh
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Hussain Abu-Dalbouh on Mar 07, 2023
Content may be subject to copyright.
Journal of Computer Science 9 (6): 763-770, 2013
ISSN: 1549-3636
© 2013 Science Publications
doi:10.3844/jcssp.2013.763.770 Published Online 9 (6) 2013 (http://www.thescipub.com/jcs.toc)
763
Science Publications JCS
A Questionnaire Approach Based
on the Technology Acceptance Model for
Mobile Tracking on Patient Progress Applications
Hussain Mohammad Abu-Dalbouh
Department of Computer Sciences,
College of Sciences and Arts at Unaizah, Al-Qassim University, Al-Qassim, Saudi Arabia
Received 2013-02-21, Revised 2013-04-11; Accepted 2013-06-06
ABSTRACT
Healthcare professionals spend much of their time wandering between patients and offices, while the
supportive technology stays stationary. Therefore, mobile applications has adapted for healthcare industry.
In spite of the advancement and variety of available mobile based applications, there is an eminent need to
investigate the current position of the acceptance of those mobile health applications that are tailored
towards the tracking patients condition, share patients information and access. Consequently, in this study
Technology Acceptance Model has designed to investigate the user acceptance of mobile technology
application within healthcare industry. The purpose of this study is to design a quantitative approach based
on the technology acceptance model questionnaire as its primary research methodology. It utilized a
quantitative approach based a Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) to evaluate the system mobile
tracking Model. The related constructs for evaluation are: Perceived of Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use,
User Satisfaction and Attribute of Usability. All these constructs are modified to suit the context of the
study. Moreover, this study outlines the details of each construct and its relevance toward the research issue.
The outcome of the study represents series of approaches that will apply for checking the suitability of a
mobile tracking on patient progress application for health care industry and how well it achieves the aims
and objectives of the design.
Keywords: Mobile Technology, Patient, Methodology, TAM, Tracking
1. INTRODUCTION
The implementation of new technology applications
to support Healthcare professionals practices requires
systematic investments and guiding (McNish, 2001;
Meijden et al., 2003; Grimshaw et al., 2004). There is
evidence of using a new technology in healthcare
industry with exploitation of specific recommendations
and guidelines will improve the quality of actions in
health care (Wollersheim et al., 2005).
Effective evaluation of healthcare information
systems is necessary in order to ensure systems
adequately meet the requirements and information
processing needs of the users and healthcare
organizations. We design a Technology Acceptance
Model to investigate user acceptance of mobile
technology within the healthcare industry. It proposes a
research methodology that being employed to understand
the objectives and requirements, design, develop and
finally, validate the mobile technology.
Research methodology is defined as procedures,
ways, methods and techniques that are employed to
capture and gather all the required information for the
purpose of the research issue. Methodology refers to that
branch of philosophy that analyzes the principles and
procedures of an inquiry in a particular discipline. It is
generally a guideline for solving a problem that outlines
specific components, example: Phases, tasks, methods,
techniques, tools and outputs. There are various methods
that can be employed in gathering information from
different sources such as sampling, site visits and
observation of the study environment, questionnaires,
Hussain Mohammad Abu-Dalbouh / Journal of Computer Science 9 (6): 763-770, 2013
764
Science Publications JCS
interviews, prototyping and joint requirement planning.
These methods would be applied in order to validate and
refine the proposed hypothesis and organized according
to structure of study. Thus, the study is organized
specially to reflect the proposed research methodology
that would be applied to address the proposed research
issue. Debates surrounding the field of research reveal
two main principal research categories: Quantitative and
qualitative. It is important to note that quantitative
research has been associated with the positivist stance
while qualitative research with the interpretative stance
(Creswell, 2011). However, qualitative and quantitative
should not be considered synonymous to interpretive and
positivist views respectively. In addition, the possibility
of qualitative and quantitative research to be either
interpretive, positivist, or critical have been proposed.
Qualitative research is a type of research that produces
findings not arrived at by means of statistical procedures
or other means of quantification and the purpose behind
the research is the understanding of human experience in
order to reveal both the processes by which people
construct meaning about their worlds and to report what
those meanings are. A qualitative research is considered
to be an investigation process that explains social
phenomenon through constructing, comparing,
replicating, categorizing and classifying the object of the
study. In other words, qualitative research is concerned
with words rather than numbers (i.e., in data that is not
quantifiable). On the other hand, quantitative research is
research that relies on developing metrics (numbers) that
can be used to describe the phenomena (objects and
relationships) under study. It is a deductive process (i.e.,
logic based on rules, models and laws) consisting of
measuring and analyzing the relationship between
variables. This process reveals how often or how many
people act in a particular way but it fails to answer the
question of “why”. Table 1 shows the comparison
between qualitative and quantitative research.
Table 1. Comparison between qualitative and quantitative rsearch
Qualitative Quantitative
What is X How many X
Inductive process Deductive process
Sample is selective Sampling is random
(non-random) Concepts and hypothesis
ar chosen before the
research begins
Researcher looks for patterns, Researcher use instrument
themes and concepts to measure the variables
in the study
Researcher develop a theory or
compares patterns with other
theories
2. MATERIALS AND METHODS
The decision of whether to carry out a qualitative or a
quantitative approach lies on the researcher’s
assumptions (Kanaan, 2009). The present study is based
quantitative approach and aquestionnaire is utilized for
the purpose of meeting the objectives of the study. We
decide on for a quantitative as it helps to provide a
description of the trends in a population or a description
of the relationships among its variables (Creswell,
2011). In addition to this advantage, a quantitative is
also inexpensive to be conducted and it is less time
consuming as it enables the researcher to acquire both
quantitative scale and qualitative data from a large
research sample. For this reason, a questionnaire design
coupled with quantitative analysis was employed in the
present study to examine the variables in the adoption
model and to achieve evaluation of using mobile
technology system for tracking patient condition.
Moreover, a Likert Scale is applied for each set of
questionnaires. The likert scale is designed to examine
how strongly subjects agree or disagree with statements
on a five-point scale with the following anchors: (1)
Strongly disagree, (2) Disagree, (3) Nature, (4) Agree,
(5) Strongly agree (Chomeya, 2010). In this study the
proposed methodology was developed in five phases.
For every phase has process step(s) and output for
better understanding of what the main goal of every
phase as presented in methodology section.
2.1. Sampling Technique
Sampling is a procedure that entails utilizing a small
number of units in a given population as a basis for
drawing conclusions regarding the whole population
(Jemain et al., 2007). The sample is considered as a
subset of the population comprising of some members
selected from it (Al-Omari et al., 2008). We aim to be
able to draw generalized conclusions based on the
population under study.
2.2. Analysis Techniques
There are three objectives of implementing data
analysis: (i) getting overview for the sample data and its
attributes, (ii) testing the goodness of data and (iii)
validating the proposed hypotheses.
2.3. Variable Measurement
The methodology applied in the study is based on the
questionnaire approach. The objective of the
questionnaire approach is basically to evaluate the
Hussain Mohammad Abu-Dalbouh / Journal of Computer Science 9 (6): 763-770, 2013
765
Science Publications JCS
mobile tracking system. The questionnaire contains:
Personal information, perceived usefulness, perceived
ease of use, user satisfaction and attribute of usability.
All of these have a number of questions constructed to
evaluate the effectives of the system mobile tracking
model to the intended users.
2.4. Proposed Methodology
This methodology is developed based upon a
combination of the available literature and the
experiences of the author, who are actively involved
with the development of using mobile technology in
health care industry. Figure 1 shows the phases of a
proposed research methodology. The sequence of the
phases is not rigid. Moving back and forth between
different phases is always required. It depends on the
outcome of each phase which phase or which
particular output of a phase, has to be performed next.
The arrows indicate the most important and frequent
dependencies between phases.
2.5. Phase 1: Problem Background
This initial phase focuses on understanding the
research objectives and requirements from
anenvironment perspective, then converting this
knowledge into a problem definition and a preliminary
plan designed to achieve the objectives. The output of
this phase is proposal.
2.6. Phase 2: Suggestion
During this phase suggest a tentative design based on
the problem definition to achieve the objectives of the
study. The output of this phase is tentative design.
2.7. Phase 3: Development
The Tentative Design will be implemented. The
output of this phase is artifact.
2.8. Phase 4: Evaluation
The evaluation was performed to determine the
correctness of the system mobile tracking Model. It utilized
a quantitative approach based a Technology Acceptance
Model (TAM). The output of this phase is acceptance.
2.9. Phase 4: Result
The last phase of proposed research methodology, it
is the finale of a specific study effort. The output of this
phase is documentation.
2.10. Technology Acceptance Theory
There are many theoretical perspectives have been
developed in order to understand how end users make
decisions to use technology applications. Theories
provide tools to understand success or failure in
implementation processes of new IT applications. The
most dominant theories in IT research are Innovation
Diffusion Theory (IDT) (Rogers, 1995), Theory of
Planned Behavior (TPB) (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975),
the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of
Technology (UTAUT) (Venkatesh et al., 2003; 2012),
the FITT framework (Ammenwerth et al., 2002) and
the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) (Davis
1989; Davis et al., 1989).
Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) (Davis, 1989;
Davis et al., 1989) is possibly the most frequently used
among all other theories (Ma and Liu, 2004; Kim and
Chang, 2007; Yarbrough and Smith, 2007). TAM theory
is based on principles adopted from Fishbein and Ajzen
(1975) attitude paradigm from psychology, which
specifies how to measure the behavior-relevant
components of attitudes, distinguishes between beliefs
and attitudes and specifies how external stimuli are
causally linked to beliefs, attitudes and behavior. The
theoretical model on which TAM is based is the Theory
of Reasoned Action (TRA). TRA is a general model
which is concerned with individuals’ intended behaviors.
According to TRA an individual’s performance is
determined by the individual’s attitude and subjective
norms concerning the behavior in question. In addition
an individual’s beliefs and motivation interact with
existing behavior (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980).
The Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)
determines the user acceptance of any technology
perceived usefulness (PU) and perceived ease of use
(PEOU) factors. PU defines as the degree to which an
individual believes that using a particular system will
enhance the task performance. PEOU defines as the
degree to which an individual believes that using a
particular system is free of physical and mental effort
(Davis, 1989; Davis et al., 1989; Davis, 1993). The TAM
suggests that intention to accept technology is
determined directly by attitude, perceived usefulness and
perceived ease of use. According to TAM individuals’
intention to use technology determines the actual use of
the application and attitudes toward technology affect the
intention (Davis et al., 1989; Davis and Venkatesh,
2004; Venkatesh et al., 2012).
Hussain Mohammad Abu-Dalbouh / Journal of Computer Science 9 (6): 763-770, 2013
766
Science Publications JCS
Fig. 1. Proposed methodology
Perceived usefulness and perceived ease factors are
affected by various external variables such as level of
education (Burton-Jones and Hubona, 2005), gender
(Venkatesh and Morris, 2000; Venkatesh et al., 2012), or
organizational features such as training in computer use
(Venkatesh, 1999; Venkatesh et al., 2012).
TAM theory is widely used in research contexts as
well as with several types of technology applications
(Chau and Hu, 2001; Lee et al., 2006; Raitoharju, 2007;
Yarbrough and Smith, 2007). TAM uses for generating
explanations for the factors of technology acceptance
that are transferable to different user populations and
different kinds of technologies.
Many different contexts and research constructions
have conformed the validity of the TAM model (Ma and
Liu, 2004; King and He, 2006), including in health care
industry (Chau and Hu, 2002a; 2002b; Chismar and
Wiley-Patton, 2003).
Hussain Mohammad Abu-Dalbouh / Journal of Computer Science 9 (6): 763-770, 2013
767
Science Publications JCS
In this study the TAM theory will be used for the
purpose of this study, to structure the research process
and to help enhance the understanding of the acceptance
and use of mobile technology in health care industry.
Individual factors such as age, gender and technology
skills are external variables in the study. Perceived
usefulness is assessed by means of the content and
benefits of the mobile tracking on patient progress
system and the barriers and facilitators to the
implementation of the system. The functionality of the
application described perceived ease of use of the
system. Attitudes toward mobile technology are taken to
consist of motivation to use portable devices, satisfaction
with mobile and experience of the benefits of mobile.
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The standard software categorizes quality into
functionality, Perceived of Usefulness, Perceived Ease of
Use, User Satisfaction and Attribute of Usability. This
study aims to design all these categories to investigate
the user acceptance of mobile tracking on patient
progress in health care industry. From the perspective of
TAM, perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, user
satisfaction and attribute of usability are assumed to be
related to the acceptance of a computer or technology
system, in this study the acceptance of a mobile
technology in tracking patient progress system.
High levels of user satisfaction are important to
mobile tracking on patient progress system. The effects
of four components of satisfaction, Perceived of
Usefulness Satisfaction and Satisfaction of Perceived
Ease of Use, User Satisfaction and Satisfaction of
Attribute of Usability on overall satisfaction among
physicians and nurses will investigate. It will discuss
about effectiveness of the using mobile technology in
healthcare industry.
3.1. Perceived of Usefulness
It is defined the degree to which a healthcare
professional believes that healthcare industry will be
improving by using mobile technology in tracking
patient condition. The measurement of perceived
usefulness comprises of 5 items modified to the context
of this study as shown in Table 2.
3.2. Perceived Ease of Use
It refers to the degree to which believes that using the
mobile tracking on patient progress system in order to
improve the quality of treatment in the hospitals. The
measurement of perceived ease of use construct
contained 5 items and modified to the context of this
study as shown in Table 3.
3.3. User Satisfaction
It can be experienced in a variety of situations and
connected to system. It is a highly personal assessment
that is greatly affected by user expectations. The
measurement of user satisfaction construct contained 5
items and modified to the context of this study as
shown in Table 4.
3.4. Attribute of Usability
It is the area of Human Computer Interaction (HCI)
with mobile tracking on patient progress system. It
attempts to bridge the gap between human’s goals and
the system. This is being done by introducing the human
issues into the design of interactive mobile tracking on
patient progress system and by devising practical
techniques to observe human behavior and observe their
performance. The measurement of attribute of usability
construct contained 5 items and modified to the context
of this study as shown in Table 5.
Table 2. Perceived of usefulness items
Construct Operational definitions Measured items
Perceived Perceived usefulness is a PU1: Mobile tracking on patient
of feeling that doctors and progress system will enable
usefulness nurses hold the doctor and nurse
toward the improvement to get the information of the patient quickly
in tracking patient PU2: The mobile tracking on patient
condition by using progress system allows the doctor to follow up
mobile tracking technology the patient condition from outside of the hospital
PU3: Mobile tracking on patient progress system is useful in the rapid retrieval of
information from the patient
PU4: Mobile tracking on patient progress system will save the time of Physicians and nurses
PU5: Using mobile technology would improve my tracking patient condition performance
Hussain Mohammad Abu-Dalbouh / Journal of Computer Science 9 (6): 763-770, 2013
768
Science Publications JCS
Table 3. Perceived ease of use items
Construct Operational definitions Measured items
Perceived Perceived ease of use refers to EU1: Learning to operate mobile
Ease of Use a level of easiness that doctors tracking on patient progress
and nurses feel when using mobile. system would be ease for me
tracking on patient progress system EU2: I would find it easy get mobile tracking on
patient progress system to do what I want it to do
EU3: My interaction with mobile tracking on patient
progress system would be clear and understandable
EU4: I would find mobile tracking on patient progress
system to be flexible to interact with
EU5: It would be easy for me to become skillful at using
mobile tracking on patient progress system
Table 4. User satisfaction items
Construct Operational definitions Measured items
User User satisfaction refers to a US1: I completely satisfied in
Satisfaction level of satisfying that using the mobile tracking
doctors and nurses on patient progress system
of using mobile tracking EU2: I feel very confident in
on patient progress system using the mobile tracking on
patient progress system
US3: I found it easy to share information
about the patient condition using
mobile tracking on patient progress
US4: I can accomplish the task quickly
using this procedure
US5: I believe that from using mobile
tracking on patient progress system will
increase the quality of health care industry
Table 5. Attribute of usability items
Construct Operational definitions Measured items
Attribute of Attribute of usability shows up potential issues in the mobile tracking on AU1: It easy to interact with mobile
Usability patient progress system. The usability helps to get feedback on what tracking on patient progress
is or isn’t working and have a much broader understanding of AU2: The procedure through mobile
what users. are doing and how they interact with the system system by tracking on patient
progress using mobile phone system by mobile phone AU3: I found it easy to decide
visited is clear firstly which the case need to be
AU4:I found the various functions
in this system were well integrate
AU5:I think that I would like to use
this system always
3.5. Future Work
Designing A Technology Acceptance Model For
Mobile Tracking On Patient Progress Applications is
simply a first step in systems development. Looking
ahead, for evaluating a mobile tracking solution in
monitoring patients after implementation using this
questionnaire design.
4. CONCLUSION
In fact, increasing and emphasizing on improving
the quality of care provided by the hospitals. We
created new needs to help and make better choices as
using the mobile application on tracking patient’s
progress. Therefore there is an eminent need to
investigate the current position of the acceptance of
Hussain Mohammad Abu-Dalbouh / Journal of Computer Science 9 (6): 763-770, 2013
769
Science Publications JCS
those mobile health applications that are tailored
towards the tracking patients' condition, share patients
information and access. We proposed methodology
designed a Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)
approach based on the literature studies aimed to
evaluate and investigate usability test for Perceived of
Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, User Satisfaction and
Attribute of Usability as important for the user
evaluation in the in Mobile Tracking On Patient Progress
System to assess if such this system mobile tracking
model will be of much use to the intended users.
5. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The author wish to thank Al-Qassim university, Saudi
Arabia. This study was supported in part by a grant from
Deanship of Scientific Research, Al-Qassim University.
6. REFERENCES
Ajzen, I. and M. Fishbein, 1980. Understanding
Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. 1st Edn.,
Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, ISBN-10:
0139364439, pp: 278.
Al-Omari, A.I., K. Jaber and A. Al-Omari, 2008.
Modified ratio-type estimators of the mean using
extreme ranked set sampling. J. Math. Stat., 4: 150-
155. DOI: 10.3844/jmssp.2008.150.155
Ammenwerth, E., F. Ehlers, U. Kutscha, A. Kutscha and
R. Eichstadter et al., 2002. Supporting patient care
by using innovative information technology. Disease
Manage. Health Outcomes, 10: 479-487. DOI:
10.2165/00115677-200210080-00004
Burton-Jones, A. and G.S. Hubona, 2005. Individual
differences and usage behavior: Revisiting a
technology acceptance model assumption. Database
Adv. Inform., 36: 58-77. DOI:
10.1145/1066149.1066155
Chau, P.Y.K. and P.J.H. Hu, 2001. Information
technology acceptance by individual professionals:
A model comparison approach. Decision Sci., 32:
699-719. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-5915.2001.tb00978.x
Chau, P.Y.K. and P.J.H. Hu, 2002a. Investigating
healthcare professionals’ decisions to accept
telemedicine technology: An empirical test of
competing theories. Inform. Manage., 39: 297-311.
DOI: 10.1016/S0378-7206(01)00098-2
Chau, P.Y.K. and P.J.H. Hu, 2002b. Examining a model
of information technology acceptance by individual
professionals: An exploratory study. J. Manage.
Inform. Syst., 18: 297-311.
Chismar, W.G. and S. Wiley-Patton, 2003. Does the
extended technology acceptance model apply to
physicians. Proceedings of the 36th Annual Hawaii
International Conference on System Sciences, Jan.
6-9, IEEE Xplore Press, pp: 160-167. DOI:
10.1109/HICSS.2003.1174354
Chomeya, R., 2010. Quality of psychology test between
likert scale 5 and 6 points. J. Soc. Sci., 6: 399-403.
DOI: 10.3844/jssp.2010.399.403
Creswell, J.W., 2011. Educational Research: Planning,
Conducting and Evaluating Quantitative and
Qualitative Research. 4th Edn., Pearson Education,
Boston, ISBN-10: 0132613948, pp: 650.
Davis, F.D. and V. Venkatesh, 2004. Toward
preprototype user acceptance testing of new
information systems: Implications for software
project management. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manage., 51:
31-46.
Davis, F.D., 1989. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease
of use and user acceptance of information
technology. MIS Q., 13: 319-340. DOI:
10.2307/249008
Davis, F.D., 1993. User acceptance of information
technology: System characteristics, user perceptions
and behavioral impacts. Int. J. Man-Mach. Stud., 38:
475-487. DOI: 10.1006/imms.1993.1022
Davis, F.D., R.P. Bagozzi and P.R. Warshaw, 1989. User
acceptance of computer technology: A comparison
of two theoretical models. Manage. Sci., 35: 982-
1003. DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982
Fishbein, M. and I. Ajzen, 1975. Belief, Attitude,
Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory
and Research. 1st Edn., Addison-Wesley, Reading,
Mass., ISBN-10: 0201020890, pp: 578.
Grimshaw, JM., R.E. Thomas, G. MacLennan, C. Fraser
and C.R. Ramsay et al., 2004. Effectiveness and
efficiency of guideline dissemination and
implementation strategies. Health Technol. Assess.
8: 1-73. PMID: 14960256
Jemain, A.A., A. Al-Omari and K. Ibrahim, 2007.
Multistage median ranked set sampling for
estimating the population median. J. Math. Stat., 3:
58-64.
Kanaan, R.K., 2009. Making sense of e-government
implementation in Jordan: A qualitative
investigation. PhD Thesis, Center of Computing and
Social Responsibility. De Montfort University,
Leicester.
Hussain Mohammad Abu-Dalbouh / Journal of Computer Science 9 (6): 763-770, 2013
770
Science Publications JCS
Kim, D. and H. Chang, 2007. Key functional
characteristics in designing and operating health
information websites for user satisfaction: An
application of the extended technology acceptance
model. Int. J. Med. Inform., 76: 790-800. DOI:
10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2006.09.001
King, W.R. and J. He, 2006. A meta-analysis of the
technology acceptance model. Inform. Manage., 43:
740-755. DOI: 10.1016/j.im.2006.05.003
Lee, S.M., I. Kim, S. Rhee and S. Trimi, 2006. The role
of exogenous factors in technology acceptance: The
case of object-oriented technology. Inform.
Manage., 43: 469-480. DOI:
10.1016/j.im.2005.11.004
Ma, Q. and L. Liu, 2004. The technology acceptance
model: A meta-analysis of empirical findings. J.
Organ. User Comput., 16: 59-72.
McNish, M., 2001. Guidelines for managing change: A
study of their effects on the implementation of new
information technology projects in organisations. J.
Change Manage., 2: 201-211. DOI:
10.1080/738552754
Meijden, M.J.V.D., H.J. Tange, J. Troost and A.
Hasman, 2003. Determinants of success of inpatient
clinical information systems: A literature review. J.
Am. Inform. Assoc., 10: 235-243. DOI:
10.1197/jamia.M1094
Raitoharju, R., 2007. Information Technology
Acceptance in the Finnish Social and Healthcare
Sector B Exploring the Effects of Cultural Factors.
1st Edn., Turku School of Economics, Turku, ISBN-
10: 9515644208, pp: 149.
Rogers, E.M., 1995. Diffusion of Innovations. 4th Edn.,
Free Press, New York, ISBN-10: 0028740742, pp:
519.
Venkatesh, V. and J.Y.L. Thong and X. Xu, 2012.
Consumer acceptance and use of information
technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance
and use of technology. MIS Q., 36: 157-178.
Venkatesh, V. and M.G. Morris, 2000. Why don’t men
ever stop to ask for directions? Gender, social
influence and their role in technology acceptance
and usage behavior. MIS Q., 24: 115-139. DOI:
10.2307/3250981
Venkatesh, V. and M.G. Morris, G.B. Davis and F.D.
Davis, 2003. User acceptance of information
technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Q., 27:
425-478.
Venkatesh, V., 1999. Creation of favorable user
perceptions: Exploring the role of intrinsic
motivation. MIS Q., 23: 239-260. DOI:
10.2307/249753
Wollersheim, H., J. Burgers and R. Grol, 2005. Clinical
guidelines to improve patient care. Netherlands J.
Med., 63: 188-192. PMID: 16011009
Yarbrough, A.K. and T.B. Smith, 2007. Technology
acceptance among physicians: A new take on TAM.
Med. Care Res. Rev., 64: 650-672. DOI:
10.1177/1077558707305942
