Abstract Mobile health (mHealth) applications are increasingly promoted as tools to support access, efficiency, and continuity of care across behavioral health and primary care settings. While patient engagement with mHealth technologies has been widely studied, clinicians play a critical role in determining whether these tools are recommended and sustained in practice. Understanding clinician readiness for mHealth applications can inform behavioral health training, workflow planning, and future technology evaluation. This exploratory study examined integrated care clinicians’ readiness for mHealth applications using Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)-informed domains, with attention to provider role, personal mHealth experience, and years of clinical experience. This cross-sectional exploratory study analyzed survey data from 59 clinicians practicing in integrated care settings in the United States. Participants included primary care physicians and behavioral health providers. Clinicians completed a Technology Acceptance Model-informed questionnaire assessing perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, attitude toward use, facilitating conditions, and intention to use mHealth applications. Descriptive statistics characterized overall readiness. Group differences were examined using independent-samples t tests with Hedges’ g effect sizes. Correlations examined associations with years of clinical experience and intention to use. Sensitivity analyses assessed distributional assumptions, ordinal response patterns, and multiple-testing concerns. Analyses emphasized effect sizes, confidence intervals, and exploratory interpretation. Overall, clinicians reported neutral to moderately favorable readiness across TAM-informed domains. Readiness did not differ meaningfully by provider role. Compared with clinicians reporting no personal mHealth use, clinicians reporting personal use had lower, more favorable scores for perceived usefulness (M = 2.95 vs. 3.59, g = 0.64), perceived ease of use (M = 2.70 vs. 3.32, g = 0.62), and attitude toward use (M = 2.82 vs. 3.56, g = 0.55). These associations did not remain statistically significant after Holm adjustment. Years of clinical experience showed a modest association with less favorable attitudes toward mHealth adoption ( r = 0.28, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.50, Holm-adjusted p = 0.209). Perceived usefulness showed the strongest association with intention to use mHealth applications ( r = 0.73, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.83). Clinicians practicing in integrated care settings demonstrated cautious openness toward mHealth applications. Personal mHealth experience showed stronger associations with readiness than provider role. Findings suggest that low-stakes experiential exposure, guided app review, and clinician-centered training may support digital health readiness in integrated care teams. Results should be interpreted as exploratory and formative rather than as validation of a TAM model.
D. J. Johnson (2026) studied this question.