User Interface Characteristics Influencing Medical Self-Service Terminals Behavioral Intention and Acceptance by Chinese Elderly: An Empirical Examination Based on an Extended UTAUT Model
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The research entitled,” User Interface Characteristics Influencing Medical Self-service Terminals Behavioural Intention and Acceptance by Chinese Elderly: An Empirical Examination Based on an Extended UTAUT Model” offers valuable recommendations for pinpointing UI design features tailored to older individuals and enhancing the MST design workflow.
This manuscript can be accepted after some revisions. I have a few queries and limitations, that can be addressed before publishing this manuscript.
1. The language needs to be improved in result and discussion potion to clearly convey the findings.
2. While the study emphasizes the importance of User Interface (UI) attributes, it may not account for all factors influencing Medical Self-service Terminal (MST) which can be discussed.
3. Also the rate of health literacy or previous technology experience should be discussed if the data is available.
4. Please mention the proportion of people with different illness stage and how the different things affect the time of hospitalization.
5. The study's cross-sectional design captures a snapshot of elderly individuals' attitudes and behaviours at a specific point in time, limiting the ability to explore changes or developments in their perceptions over time. This is just the reviewer’s thought and this comment does not need to be answered.
6. The research explores UI attributes but the strategies for practical implementation for improving MST interfaces should also be discussed in detail.
Although i do not find any grammatical mistake but the language in result section can be improved to convey the findings in a clearer manner.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you very much for the review comments you pointed out, which made me gain a lot. The following is my reply to your comments:
- The language needs to be improved in result and discussion potion to clearly convey the findings.
Lan:The presentation of the results and discussion sections has been improved to make them clearer.
- While the study emphasizes the importance of User Interface (UI) attributes, it may not account for all factors influencing Medical Self-service Terminal (MST) which can be discussed.
Lan:We added this to the discussion section.
- Also the rate of health literacy or previous technology experience should be discussed if the data is available.
Lan:We are sorry that we do not have data on this, but we have added the literature on health popularization in the discussion section to supplement it.
- Please mention the proportion of people with different illness stage and how the different things affect the time of hospitalization.
Lan:We are very sorry that we do not have detailed data on this aspect, but we have added the management factors affecting this aspect in the discussion section.
- The study's cross-sectional design captures a snapshot of elderly individuals' attitudes and behaviours at a specific point in time, limiting the ability to explore changes or developments in their perceptions over time. This is just the reviewer’s thought and this comment does not need to be answered.
Lan:Thank you for your correction, which is also one of the limiting factors of our paper. We will try our best to improve this research in the future.
- The research explores UI attributes but the strategies for practical implementation for improving MST interfaces should also be discussed in detail.
Lan:We added the implementation strategy for MST in the discussion section.
7)Although i do not find any grammatical mistake but the language in result section can be improved to convey the findings in a clearer manner.
Lan:We have edited the whole article in English and revised the conclusion according to your suggestion.
Best regards,
Lan Huang
Reviewer 2 Report
From my perspective, there are still minor problems in this manuscript. The authors should improve the manuscript as follows:
There are several grammatical errors that need to be addressed in the manuscript.
The length of the ABSTRACT should be crosschecked with the journal author's guidelines. Illustrate the novelty of the work.
The readability and presentation of the study should be further improved.
The study lacks related work, and references in the literature need to be updated to the most up-to-date versions.
The presented work in literature is not sufficient. Additionally, the recent papers (2021, 2022, and 2023) should be added in your work. I recommend the authors to review other recently developed works.
Sound literature review (add the latest papers (2020, 2021, 2022, and 2023)) is desirable to perform a meta-analysis of available work and establish a ground for the proposed work.
Need to add the graphical representation of each table depicting results.
Future enhancements in the conclusion section to be added.
Moderate English editing is required in the manuscript.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you very much for the review comments you pointed out, which made me gain a lot. The following is my reply to your comments:
- There are several grammatical errors that need to be addressed in the manuscript.
Lan:We have reviewed and polished the syntax of the full text.
- The length of the ABSTRACT should be crosschecked with the journal author's guidelines. Illustrate the novelty of the work.
Lan:We have revised the abstract in accordance with the journal guidelines.
- The readability and presentation of the study should be further improved.
Lan:We have finished polishing the full text in English.
- The study lacks related work, and references in the literature need to be updated to the most up-to-date versions.The presented work in literature is not sufficient. Additionally, the recent papers (2021, 2022, and 2023) should be added in your work. I recommend the authors to review other recently developed works.Sound literature review (add the latest papers (2020, 2021, 2022, and 2023)) is desirable to perform a meta-analysis of available work and establish a ground for the proposed work.
Lan:We have added the latest literature to complement the relevant work.
- Need to add the graphical representation of each table depicting results.
Lan:We have finished adjusting the charts in the paper.
- Future enhancements in the conclusion section to be added.
Lan:We have added recommendations for future implementation to the discussion and conclusion sections.
- Moderate English editing is required in the manuscript.
Lan:We hired English professionals to polish our paper.
Best regards,
Lan Huang
Reviewer 3 Report
The paper is interesting with promising results. I have several comments:
1. Deeper state of the art is missing, please add this section
2. The architecture of proposed research framework is missing, please add the architecture
3. Please add more relevant references - connected with point 1
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you very much for the review comments you pointed out, which made me gain a lot. The following is my reply to your comments:
1)Deeper state of the art is missing, please add this section
Lan:We have added the latest literature to complement the relevant work.
- The architecture of proposed research framework is missing, please add the architecture
Lan:The proposed research framework has been added to the paper, as shown in Figure 3
- Please add more relevant references - connected with point 1
Lan:We have added the latest literature to complement the relevant work.
Best regards,
Lan Huang
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors have made significant improvements in the paper. The revise introduction now provides a clear context for the study and I appreciate the addition of more recent references, which strengthens the paper's relevance addressing my earlier concern.
Reviewer 3 Report
The paper was sufficiently updated and can be accepted.
