Acceptance of smart sensing: a barrier to implementation—results from a randomized controlled trial

BackgroundAccurate and timely diagnostics are essential for effective mental healthcare. Given a resource- and time-limited mental healthcare system, novel digital and scalable diagnostic approaches such as smart sensing, which utilizes digital markers collected via sensors from digital devices, are...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Yannik Terhorst, Nadine Weilbacher, Carolin Suda, Laura Simon, Eva-Maria Messner, Lasse Bosse Sander, Harald Baumeister
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Frontiers Media S.A. 2023-07-01
Series:Frontiers in Digital Health
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fdgth.2023.1075266/full
_version_ 1797780874214768640
author Yannik Terhorst
Nadine Weilbacher
Carolin Suda
Laura Simon
Eva-Maria Messner
Lasse Bosse Sander
Harald Baumeister
author_facet Yannik Terhorst
Nadine Weilbacher
Carolin Suda
Laura Simon
Eva-Maria Messner
Lasse Bosse Sander
Harald Baumeister
author_sort Yannik Terhorst
collection DOAJ
description BackgroundAccurate and timely diagnostics are essential for effective mental healthcare. Given a resource- and time-limited mental healthcare system, novel digital and scalable diagnostic approaches such as smart sensing, which utilizes digital markers collected via sensors from digital devices, are explored. While the predictive accuracy of smart sensing is promising, its acceptance remains unclear. Based on the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology, the present study investigated (1) the effectiveness of an acceptance facilitating intervention (AFI), (2) the determinants of acceptance, and (3) the acceptance of adults toward smart sensing.MethodsThe participants (N = 202) were randomly assigned to a control group (CG) or intervention group (IG). The IG received a video AFI on smart sensing, and the CG a video on mindfulness. A reliable online questionnaire was used to assess acceptance, performance expectancy, effort expectancy, facilitating conditions, social influence, and trust. The self-reported interest in using and the installation of a smart sensing app were assessed as behavioral outcomes. The intervention effects were investigated in acceptance using t-tests for observed data and latent structural equation modeling (SEM) with full information maximum likelihood to handle missing data. The behavioral outcomes were analyzed with logistic regression. The determinants of acceptance were analyzed with SEM. The root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) and standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) were used to evaluate the model fit.ResultsThe intervention did not affect the acceptance (p = 0.357), interest (OR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.42–1.32, p = 0.314), or installation rate (OR = 0.29, 95% CI: 0.01–2.35, p = 0.294). The performance expectancy (γ = 0.45, p < 0.001), trust (γ = 0.24, p = 0.002), and social influence (γ = 0.32, p = 0.008) were identified as the core determinants of acceptance explaining 68% of its variance. The SEM model fit was excellent (RMSEA = 0.06, SRMR = 0.05). The overall acceptance was M = 10.9 (SD = 3.73), with 35.41% of the participants showing a low, 47.92% a moderate, and 10.41% a high acceptance.DiscussionThe present AFI was not effective. The low to moderate acceptance of smart sensing poses a major barrier to its implementation. The performance expectancy, social influence, and trust should be targeted as the core factors of acceptance. Further studies are needed to identify effective ways to foster the acceptance of smart sensing and to develop successful implementation strategies.Clinical Trial Registrationidentifier 10.17605/OSF.IO/GJTPH.
first_indexed 2024-03-12T23:49:58Z
format Article
id doaj.art-0d47dd72cf32441da5890bd596c832cb
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2673-253X
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-12T23:49:58Z
publishDate 2023-07-01
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format Article
series Frontiers in Digital Health
spelling doaj.art-0d47dd72cf32441da5890bd596c832cb2023-07-13T16:52:10ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Digital Health2673-253X2023-07-01510.3389/fdgth.2023.10752661075266Acceptance of smart sensing: a barrier to implementation—results from a randomized controlled trialYannik Terhorst0Nadine Weilbacher1Carolin Suda2Laura Simon3Eva-Maria Messner4Lasse Bosse Sander5Harald Baumeister6Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Institute of Psychology and Education, University Ulm, Ulm, GermanyDepartment of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Institute of Psychology and Education, University Ulm, Ulm, GermanyDepartment of Rehabilitation Psychology and Psychotherapy, Institute of Psychology, Albert-Ludwigs University Freiburg, Freiburg, GermanyDepartment of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Institute of Psychology and Education, University Ulm, Ulm, GermanyDepartment of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Institute of Psychology and Education, University Ulm, Ulm, GermanyMedical Psychology and Medical Sociology, Faculty of Medicine, Albert-Ludwigs University Freiburg, Freiburg, GermanyDepartment of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Institute of Psychology and Education, University Ulm, Ulm, GermanyBackgroundAccurate and timely diagnostics are essential for effective mental healthcare. Given a resource- and time-limited mental healthcare system, novel digital and scalable diagnostic approaches such as smart sensing, which utilizes digital markers collected via sensors from digital devices, are explored. While the predictive accuracy of smart sensing is promising, its acceptance remains unclear. Based on the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology, the present study investigated (1) the effectiveness of an acceptance facilitating intervention (AFI), (2) the determinants of acceptance, and (3) the acceptance of adults toward smart sensing.MethodsThe participants (N = 202) were randomly assigned to a control group (CG) or intervention group (IG). The IG received a video AFI on smart sensing, and the CG a video on mindfulness. A reliable online questionnaire was used to assess acceptance, performance expectancy, effort expectancy, facilitating conditions, social influence, and trust. The self-reported interest in using and the installation of a smart sensing app were assessed as behavioral outcomes. The intervention effects were investigated in acceptance using t-tests for observed data and latent structural equation modeling (SEM) with full information maximum likelihood to handle missing data. The behavioral outcomes were analyzed with logistic regression. The determinants of acceptance were analyzed with SEM. The root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) and standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) were used to evaluate the model fit.ResultsThe intervention did not affect the acceptance (p = 0.357), interest (OR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.42–1.32, p = 0.314), or installation rate (OR = 0.29, 95% CI: 0.01–2.35, p = 0.294). The performance expectancy (γ = 0.45, p < 0.001), trust (γ = 0.24, p = 0.002), and social influence (γ = 0.32, p = 0.008) were identified as the core determinants of acceptance explaining 68% of its variance. The SEM model fit was excellent (RMSEA = 0.06, SRMR = 0.05). The overall acceptance was M = 10.9 (SD = 3.73), with 35.41% of the participants showing a low, 47.92% a moderate, and 10.41% a high acceptance.DiscussionThe present AFI was not effective. The low to moderate acceptance of smart sensing poses a major barrier to its implementation. The performance expectancy, social influence, and trust should be targeted as the core factors of acceptance. Further studies are needed to identify effective ways to foster the acceptance of smart sensing and to develop successful implementation strategies.Clinical Trial Registrationidentifier 10.17605/OSF.IO/GJTPH.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fdgth.2023.1075266/fullsmart sensingdigital healthacceptanceimplementationunified theory of acceptance and use of technology acceptance of smart sensing
spellingShingle Yannik Terhorst
Nadine Weilbacher
Carolin Suda
Laura Simon
Eva-Maria Messner
Lasse Bosse Sander
Harald Baumeister
Acceptance of smart sensing: a barrier to implementation—results from a randomized controlled trial
Frontiers in Digital Health
smart sensing
digital health
acceptance
implementation
unified theory of acceptance and use of technology acceptance of smart sensing
title Acceptance of smart sensing: a barrier to implementation—results from a randomized controlled trial
title_full Acceptance of smart sensing: a barrier to implementation—results from a randomized controlled trial
title_fullStr Acceptance of smart sensing: a barrier to implementation—results from a randomized controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Acceptance of smart sensing: a barrier to implementation—results from a randomized controlled trial
title_short Acceptance of smart sensing: a barrier to implementation—results from a randomized controlled trial
title_sort acceptance of smart sensing a barrier to implementation results from a randomized controlled trial
topic smart sensing
digital health
acceptance
implementation
unified theory of acceptance and use of technology acceptance of smart sensing
url https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fdgth.2023.1075266/full
work_keys_str_mv AT yannikterhorst acceptanceofsmartsensingabarriertoimplementationresultsfromarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT nadineweilbacher acceptanceofsmartsensingabarriertoimplementationresultsfromarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT carolinsuda acceptanceofsmartsensingabarriertoimplementationresultsfromarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT laurasimon acceptanceofsmartsensingabarriertoimplementationresultsfromarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT evamariamessner acceptanceofsmartsensingabarriertoimplementationresultsfromarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT lassebossesander acceptanceofsmartsensingabarriertoimplementationresultsfromarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT haraldbaumeister acceptanceofsmartsensingabarriertoimplementationresultsfromarandomizedcontrolledtrial