MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367678415 · doi:10.1080/20479700.2023.2198186

Determining the intention to use app-based medicine service in an emerging economy

2023· article· en· W4367678415 on OpenAlexaff
Selim Ahmed, Ibrahim Alqasmi, Dewan Mehrab Ashrafi, Musfiq Mannan Choudhury, Muhammad Khalilur Rahman, Muhammad Mohiuddin

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Healthcare Management · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessService (business)MarketingSharing economyAdvertisingComputer scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study investigates the customers’ intention to use app-based medicine services in an emerging economy. This study explores the indirect effects of perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, perceived security and perceived delivery with the intention to use app-based medicine services through the mediating effect of perceived trust. The present study developed a self-administered survey questionnaire to collect data from 336 respondents who were using app-based medicine services in Bangladesh. The data was collected between March 2022 and May 2022. The collected data were analysed using SmartPLS-4 to determine the reliability and validity of the constructs. The study's findings indicate that perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, perceived security, and perceived delivery positively and significantly (t > 1.96; P < 0.05) influence the perceived trust in app-based medicine services. The research findings also indicate that perceived ease of use, perceived delivery, and perceived trust significantly (t > 1.96; P < 0.05) impact the intention to use app-based medicine services. This study highlights to explore the success factors such as consumer perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, perceived security, and perceived delivery that can increase customers’ trust to use app-based medicine services in the developing economy.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.511
Threshold uncertainty score0.428

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.130
GPT teacher head0.491
Teacher spread0.361 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Healthcare ManagementSame topicMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207