Exploring the key factors in the choice of home telehealth by using the health belief model

Telemedicine and e-Health

Volumn 15, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 87-92

  Huang, Jui Chen ^a   Lin, Shu Ping ^a  

^a CHUNG HUA UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

Consumer health information; Health belief model; Home telehealth; Key factors

Indexed keywords

BEHAVIORAL INTENTIONS; CAUSAL MODELS; CONFIRMATORY FACTOR ANALYSIS; CONSUMER HEALTH INFORMATION; CRITICAL FACTORS; DEMOGRAPHIC PARAMETERS; EVALUATION SYSTEMS; HEALTH BELIEF MODEL; HOME TELEHEALTH; KEY FACTORS; MEASUREMENT MODELS; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCES; STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING TECHNIQUES;

DECISION MAKING; HEALTH; MULTIVARIANT ANALYSIS; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; RELIABILITY; RELIABILITY ANALYSIS;

MEDICAL COMPUTING;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BEHAVIOR; CAUSAL MODELING; CONSUMER HEALTH INFORMATION; DECISION MAKING; EVALUATION; FACTORIAL ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HEALTH BELIEF MODEL; HOME CARE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; PARAMETER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RELIABILITY; SCHEFFE TEST; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING; TAIWAN; TELEHEALTH; VALIDITY;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; FEMALE; HOME CARE SERVICES; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; MODELS, STATISTICAL; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; PSYCHOMETRICS; QUESTIONNAIRES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; TAIWAN; TELEMEDICINE; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 59949083048     PISSN: 15305627     EISSN: 15563669     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1089/tmj.2008.0069     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Miller EA. Solving the disjuncture between research and practice: Telehealth trends in the 21st century. Health Policy 2007;82:133- 141.
2. Koch S. Home Telehealth - Current state and future trends. Int J Med Informatics 2006;75:565-576.
3. Sun X, Guo Y, Wang S, Sun J. Predicting iron-fortified soy sauce consumption intention: Application of the theory of planned behavior and health belief model. J Nutr Educ Behav 2006;38:276-285.
4. Simsekoglu Ö, Lajunen T. Social psychology of seat belt use: A comparison of theory of planned behavior and health belief model. Transport Res Part F Traffic Psychol Behav 2008;11:181-191.
5. Rosenstock IM. Why people use health services. Milbank Mem Fund Q 1966;44:94-124.
6. Rosenstock IM. Historical origins of the health belief model. Health Educ Monogr 1974;2:1-8.
7. Strecher VJ, Rosenstock IM. The health belief model. In: Glanz K, Lewis RM, Rimer B, eds. Health behavior and health education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1997:41-59.
8. Davis FD, Bagozzi RP, Warshaw PR. User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Manage Sci 1989;35:982- 1003.
9. Sheppard BH, Hartwick J, Warshaw PR. The theory of reasoned action: A meta-analysis of past research with recommendations for modifications and future research. J Consum Res 1988;15:325-343.
10. Cheng TCE, Lam DYC, Yeung ALC. Adoption of Internet banking: An empirical study in Hong Kong. Decis Support Syst 2006;42:1558-1572.
11. Agarwal R, Prasad J. Are individual differences germane to the acceptance of new information technologies? Decis Sci 1999;30:361-391.
12. Ajzen I. From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior, action-control: From cognition to behavior. Heidelberg: Springer, 1985.
13. Ajzen I. Attitude, personality, and behavior. Milton Keynes, England: Open University Press, 1989.
14. Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behav Hum Decis Proc 1991;50:179-211.
15. Fishbein M, Ajzen I. Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1975.
16. Ajzen I, Fishbein M. Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1980.
17. DeWit JBF, Vet R, Schutten M, Steenbergen JV. Social-cognitive determinants of vaccination behavior against hepatitis B: An assessment among men who have sex with men. Prev Med 2005;40:795-802.
18. Hu L, Bentler PM. Cut-off criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equation Model 1999;1:31.
19. Bagozzi RP, Yi Y. On the evaluation of structural equation models. J Acad Market Sci 1988;16:74-94.
20. Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE, Tatham RL. Multivariate data analysis, 6th ed. New York: Macmillan, 2006.
21. Chau PYK, Hu PJ-H. Investigating healthcare professionals' decisions to accept telemedicine technology: An empirical test of competing theories. Inf Manage 2002;39:297-311.
22. Wilson EV, Lankton NK. Modeling patients' acceptance of provider-delivered e-health. J Am Med Inf Assoc 2004;11:241-248.
23. Taylor S, Todd PA. Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models. Inf Syst Res 1995;6:144-176.