↓ Skip to main content

Implementation factors and their effect on e-Health service adoption in rural communities: a systematic literature review

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
26 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
46 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
196 Mendeley
Title
Implementation factors and their effect on e-Health service adoption in rural communities: a systematic literature review
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, January 2013
DOI 10.1186/1472-6963-13-19
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eveline Hage, John P Roo, Marjolein AG van Offenbeek, Albert Boonstra

Abstract

An ageing population is seen as a threat to the quality of life and health in rural communities, and it is often assumed that e-Health services can address this issue. As successful e-Health implementation in organizations has proven difficult, this systematic literature review considers whether this is so for rural communities. This review identifies the critical implementation factors and, following the change model of Pettigrew and Whipp, classifies them in terms of "context", "process", and "content". Through this lens, we analyze the empirical findings found in the literature to address the question: How do context, process, and content factors of e-Health implementation influence its adoption in rural communities?

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 196 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 <1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Poland 1 <1%
Unknown 191 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 50 26%
Student > Master 45 23%
Researcher 17 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 17 9%
Student > Postgraduate 16 8%
Other 37 19%
Unknown 14 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 36 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 33 17%
Computer Science 32 16%
Business, Management and Accounting 27 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 6%
Other 34 17%
Unknown 23 12%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 February 2013.
All research outputs
#681,972
of 12,372,945 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#248
of 4,083 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,823
of 263,067 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#18
of 403 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,372,945 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,083 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 263,067 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 403 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.