IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-04428148.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Assessing the acceptability of technological health innovations in sub‑Saharan Africa: a scoping review and a best fit framework synthesis

Author

Listed:
  • Sarah Louart

    (ALIMA - Alliance for International medical Action, CLERSÉ - Centre Lillois d’Études et de Recherches Sociologiques et Économiques - UMR 8019 - Université de Lille - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, CEPED - UMR_D 196 - Centre population et développement - IRD - Institut de Recherche pour le Développement - UPCité - Université Paris Cité)

  • Gildas Boris Hedible

    (CERPOP - Centre d'Epidémiologie et de Recherche en santé des POPulations - UT3 - Université Toulouse III - Paul Sabatier - UT - Université de Toulouse - INSERM - Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale)

  • Valery Ridde

    (UCAD - Université Cheikh Anta Diop de Dakar [Sénégal], CEPED - UMR_D 196 - Centre population et développement - IRD - Institut de Recherche pour le Développement - UPCité - Université Paris Cité)

Abstract

Acceptability is a key concept used to analyze the introduction of a health innovation in a specific setting. However, there seems to be a lack of clarity in this notion, both conceptually and practically. In low and middle-income countries, programs to support the diffusion of new technological tools are multiplying. They face challenges and difficulties that need to be understood with an in-depth analysis of the acceptability of these innovations. We performed a scoping review to explore the theories, methods and conceptual frameworks that have been used to measure and understand the acceptability of technological health innovations in sub-Saharan Africa. The review confirmed the lack of common definitions, conceptualizations and practical tools addressing the acceptability of health innovations. To synthesize and combine evidence, both theoretically and empirically, we then used the "best fit framework synthesis" method. Based on five conceptual and theoretical frameworks from scientific literature and evidence from 33 empirical studies, we built a conceptual framework in order to understand the acceptability of technological health innovations. This framework comprises 6 determinants (compatibility, social influence, personal emotions, perceived disadvantages, perceived advantages and perceived complexity) and two moderating factors (intervention and context). This knowledge synthesis work has also enabled us to propose a chronology of the different stages of acceptability.

Suggested Citation

  • Sarah Louart & Gildas Boris Hedible & Valery Ridde, 2023. "Assessing the acceptability of technological health innovations in sub‑Saharan Africa: a scoping review and a best fit framework synthesis," Post-Print hal-04428148, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-04428148
    DOI: 10.1186/s12913-023-09897-4
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.univ-lille.fr/hal-04428148
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.univ-lille.fr/hal-04428148/document
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1186/s12913-023-09897-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert D. Dewar & Jane E. Dutton, 1986. "The Adoption of Radical and Incremental Innovations: An Empirical Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(11), pages 1422-1433, November.
    2. Viswanath Venkatesh & Fred D. Davis, 2000. "A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(2), pages 186-204, February.
    3. David Moher & Alessandro Liberati & Jennifer Tetzlaff & Douglas G Altman & The PRISMA Group, 2009. "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(7), pages 1-6, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ukobitz, Desirée Valeria & Faullant, Rita, 2022. "The relative impact of isomorphic pressures on the adoption of radical technology: Evidence from 3D printing," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    2. Xin Xu & Viswanath Venkatesh & Kar Yan Tam & Se-Joon Hong, 2010. "Model of Migration and Use of Platforms: Role of Hierarchy, Current Generation, and Complementarities in Consumer Settings," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(8), pages 1304-1323, August.
    3. Liliane Manny & Mert Duygan & Manuel Fischer & Jörg Rieckermann, 2021. "Barriers to the digital transformation of infrastructure sectors," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(4), pages 943-983, December.
    4. Huang, Dan & Jin, Xin & Coghlan, Alexandra, 2021. "Advances in consumer innovation resistance research: A review and research agenda," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    5. Salvador Angosto & Jerónimo García-Fernández & Irena Valantine & Moisés Grimaldi-Puyana, 2020. "The Intention to Use Fitness and Physical Activity Apps: A Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-25, August.
    6. Osrof, Hazem Yusuf & Tan, Cheng Ling & Angappa, Gunasekaran & Yeo, Sook Fern & Tan, Kim Hua, 2023. "Adoption of smart farming technologies in field operations: A systematic review and future research agenda," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    7. Christine Milchram & Geerten Van de Kaa & Neelke Doorn & Rolf Künneke, 2018. "Moral Values as Factors for Social Acceptance of Smart Grid Technologies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-23, August.
    8. Rajak, Manindra & Shaw, Krishnendu, 2021. "An extension of technology acceptance model for mHealth user adoption," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    9. José A. García-Berná & Raimel Sobrino-Duque & Juan M. Carrillo de Gea & Joaquín Nicolás & José L. Fernández-Alemán, 2022. "Automated Workflow for Usability Audits in the PHR Realm," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-30, July.
    10. van Hezewijk, A.P. & van Assen, M.F. & van de Velde, S.L., 2003. "The impact of innovation and organizational factors on APS adoption: Evidence from the Dutch discrete parts industry," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2003-084-LIS, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    11. Thomas, Rosemary J. & O'Hare, Gregory & Coyle, David, 2023. "Understanding technology acceptance in smart agriculture: A systematic review of empirical research in crop production," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    12. Saeideh Sharifi fard & Ezhar Tamam & Md Salleh Hj Hassan & Moniza Waheed & Zeinab Zaremohzzabieh, 2016. "Factors affecting Malaysian university students’ purchase intention in social networking sites," Cogent Business & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(1), pages 1182612-118, December.
    13. İlkay Unay-Gailhard & Mark A. Brennen, 2022. "How digital communications contribute to shaping the career paths of youth: a review study focused on farming as a career option," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(4), pages 1491-1508, December.
    14. Davood Askarany & Malcolm Smith, 2008. "Diffusion of innovation and business size: a longitudinal study of PACIA," Managerial Auditing Journal, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 23(9), pages 900-916, October.
    15. Mahin Ghafari & Vali Baigi & Zahra Cheraghi & Amin Doosti-Irani, 2016. "The Prevalence of Asymptomatic Bacteriuria in Iranian Pregnant Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(6), pages 1-10, June.
    16. Santos Urbina & Sofía Villatoro & Jesús Salinas, 2021. "Self-Regulated Learning and Technology-Enhanced Learning Environments in Higher Education: A Scoping Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-12, June.
    17. Chou, Jui-Sheng & Gusti Ayu Novi Yutami, I, 2014. "Smart meter adoption and deployment strategy for residential buildings in Indonesia," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 336-349.
    18. Philippe Cohard, 2020. "Information Systems Values: A Study of the Intranet in Three French Higher Education Institutions," Post-Print hal-02987225, HAL.
    19. Nadine Desrochers & Adèle Paul‐Hus & Jen Pecoskie, 2017. "Five decades of gratitude: A meta‐synthesis of acknowledgments research," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(12), pages 2821-2833, December.
    20. Maryono, Maryono & Killoes, Aditya Marendra & Adhikari, Rajendra & Abdul Aziz, Ammar, 2024. "Agriculture development through multi-stakeholder partnerships in developing countries: A systematic literature review," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-04428148. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.