|  |  | + = strength | - = weakness | +/− = strength and weakness |  |  |  | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 |  | Criteria |  |  |  | Summary | ||||||||
Frameworks | Description of the purpose (and the addressed question(s) | Description of the application setting | Description of the technology (area) | Clarity/ complexity of illustration | Visualization of connections and relationships within the framework | Transparent definitions of terms and key concepts | Concrete application strategy and instructions for use | Instruction on how the results can be interpreted | Transparency of development process | Reflection of the limitations of the framework | Transferability of the framework (Settings, technologies, questions) | + | – | +/− |
Health Technology Adoption Framework [33] | + | + | + | + | – | + | + | + | + | + | +/− | 9 | 1 | 1 |
Clinical Information Systems Success Model (CISSM) [21] | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | – | +/− | 9 | 1 | 1 |
Nonadoption, Abandonment, Scale-up, Spread, and Sustainability Framework (NASSS Framework) [34] | + | +/− | +/− | + | + | + | +/− | + | + | + | + | 8 | 0 | 3 |
Health Information Technology Evaluation Framework (HITREF) [26] | + | +/− | + | + | + | + | + | – | + | – | + | 8 | 2 | 1 |
Evaluation Framework for Fit-For-Purpose Connected Sensor Technologies [19] | + | +/− | + | + | – | + | + | + | + | – | + | 8 | 2 | 1 |
Hospital Information System Success Framework [27] | + | + | + | – | – | + | + | – | + | + | + | 8 | 3 | 0 |
Adapted nursing care performance framework [30] | + | +/− | + | + | + | + | – | +/− | – | + | + | 7 | 2 | 2 |
The layered telemedicine implementation model [23] | + | +/− | + | + | + | + | +/− | – | + | + | – | 7 | 2 | 2 |
Model for Assessment of Telemedicine (MAST Manual) [31] | + | +/− | + | – | – | + | + | – | + | + | + | 7 | 3 | 1 |
Health technology assessment framework for digital healthcare services (Digi HTA) [20] | + | +/− | + | – | – | + | + | + | + | – | + | 7 | 3 | 1 |
Infoway benefits evaluation Framework [25] | + | +/− | +/− | + | + | + | – | – | + | – | + | 6 | 3 | 2 |
Design and Evaluation of DHI Framework [14] | + | +/− | +/− | – | – | + | + | – | + | + | + | 6 | 3 | 2 |
RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance) (expanded to clinical informatics)) [35] | + | +/− | +/− | – | – | + | + | + | + | – | + | 6 | 3 | 2 |
Development of an Evaluation Framework for Health Information Systems (DIPSA Framework) [28] | + | + | + | – | – | + | – | – | + | – | + | 6 | 5 | 0 |
Khoja–Durrani–Scott Framework for e-Health Evaluation [22] | + | +/− | +/− | – | + | + | – | – | + | – | + | 5 | 4 | 2 |
Digital Health Score Card [32] | + | +/− | +/− | + | + | + | – | – | – | – | – | 4 | 5 | 2 |
Human, Organization, Process and Technology-fit (HOPT-FIT) [29] | + | +/− | + | + | + | – | – | – | – | – | – | 4 | 6 | 1 |
Comprehensive evaluation framework for telemedicine implementation [24] | + | +/− | + | + | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | 3 | 7 | 1 |