Table 2.
Summary of the key findings (2004–2023, n = 562)
| Theme | Meaning | Codes and sub-codes | Number of articles with this theme | Number of studies based in Global North | Key findings about the theme | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | Awareness and familiarity | Prior knowledge about health monitoring technologies | Familiar, unfamiliar | 59 | 44 |
62.7% studies reported unfamiliarity, while 37.3% studies reported familiarity The findings on the relationship between health risks and knowledge about technologies are contradictory. For example, a focus group study with 17 participants found patients’ anxiety about health issues motivated them to familiarize themselves with activity monitors15. At the same time, a community-based population survey with 317 respondents found that hypertension was not correlated with their use of wearable blood pressure technology16. |
| Determinants of knowledge | Socio-demographic factors, perceived usefulness | 6 | 6 | |||
| Acceptability | Acceptance | Acceptance of technologies | Mixed, low interest/negative, positive | 294 | 233 |
88.1% found positive attitudes to technologies, 8.8% found negative or low interest in them, and 3.1% found mixed Some found a correlation between respondents’ socio-economic background characteristics and acceptability, but others did not. |
| Determinants of acceptance | Correlation or no correlation with socio-demographic factors, self-control, appearance, external factors, technology difference, desire, location, knowledge, relationship with others, perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, security | 136 | 100 | |||
| Usability | User experience | User experience of technologies | Ease of use, comfortable, appealing appearance, durability, language, self-application, technical difficulties | 335 | 141 |
Of 270 articles examining perceived ease of use, 214 found users regarded technologies easy to use. Of 99 articles examining perceived comfort, 83 reported comfortable to use. Of 90 studies about opinions on device appearance, 39 studies found devices visually appealing. Perceived usability problems varied with respondents’ socio-demographic characteristics. For example, interviews with 20 pregnant women in their second trimester found a finger ring to monitor sleep/stress data might be too big for women45. Interviews with seven patients found old people felt difficult to seal an oxygen device46. |
| Improvement of usability | Information storage, eliminate Ads, offline activity, more inclusive, Context of use, justification, comfort, wording, loss, unobtrusiveness, functionality, location, gamification, tailored feedback, data interpretation, appearance features | 231 | 197 | |||
| Motivations and barriers | Motivations | Factors motivating or preventing informants from using technologies | Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, social relationship, competition, curiosity, anxiety, pleasure, fun/coolness, brand, external environment, giving back | 163 | 136 | Anxiety about health risks and perceived usefulness to mitigate risks were major motivations for use of tracking devices. |
| Barriers | Unfit body shape, not inclusive, usability issue, no correlation, not convinced, the foreign body, lack of autonomy, lack of collaboration, knowledge, forget, incompatible with other devices, access issues, cost (time, money, etc), functionality, interfere current life, replace existing care, no need, embarrassment, data sharing concern, distrust | 187 | 153 |
Affordability is a direct barrier preventing people from using monitoring technologies. Certain groups are digitally excluded. For example, interviews and workshops with the queer community indicate that gender options for wearables lack queer option59. Another focus group study found age prevents the elderly from using wireless healthcare sensors independently27. |
||
| How to motivate | Compatibility, reduce cost, award/stimulus, promote understanding, one-to-one basis/build relationship | 34 | 28 | The most frequently mentioned incentive for technology adoption is a trusting relationship between manufacturers and potential users. | ||
| Perceived benefits | Perceived advantages of technologies | Technology development, individualized treatment, contribute to research/social good, promote policy/infrastructure, improve privacy, supplement/replace routine test, security, good relationship, legitimize their symptoms, behavior change, awareness, reduction burden, improving their adherence, support, improve confidence/accomplishment, self-control | 284 | 250 | Increasing health consciousness, changing behaviors, and improving social relationships are three major perceived benefits. | |
| Perceived risks | Concerns about technologies | Impact professionalism, dehumanizing care, decrease opportunity, bias Accuracy, surveillance, burden, reduced autonomy, adverse events, privacy, malfunction | 213 | 194 |
Three major concerns are privacy, accuracy, and feeling burdened. Certain groups were more concerned about risks of monitoring technologies. For example, a survey of 241 women using fertility trackers found women trying to conceive were the most skeptical about the accuracy of fertility apps69 Research also indicates that women and those with university education were more perceptive to privacy risks92. |
|