Assessment of private hospital portals: A conceptual model

Document Type: Articles


No. 1090, Palestin Intersection Enghelab Ave, Tehran, Iran


Introduction: Hospital portals, as the first virtual entry, play an important role in connecting people with hospital and also presenting hospital virtual services. The main purpose of this article was to suggest a conceptual model to improve Tehran private hospital portals. The suggested model can be used by all the health portals that are in the same circumstances and all the health portals which are in progress.Method: This is a practical research, using evaluative survey research method. Research population includes all the private hospital portals in Tehran, 34 portals, and ten top international hospital portals. Data gathering tool used in this research was a researcher-made checklist including 14 criteria and 77 sub-criteria with their weight score. In fact, objective observation with the mentioned checklist was used to gather information. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data and tables and graphs were used to present the organized data. Also, data were analyzed using independent t-test. Conceptual modeling technique was used to design the model and demonstration method was used to evaluate the proposed model. In this regard, SPSS statistical software was used to perform the tests.Results:The comparative study between the two groups of portals, TPH and WTH, in the 14 main criteria showed that the value of t-test in contact information criteria was 0.862, portal page specification was -1.378, page design criteria -1.527, updating pages -0.322, general information and access roads -3.161, public services -7.302, patient services -4.154, patient data -8.703, research and education -9.155, public relationship -3.009, page technical specifications -4.726, telemedicine -7.488, pharmaceutical services -6.183, and financial services -2.782. Finally, the findings demonstrated that Tehran private hospital portals in criterion of contact information were favorable; page design criteria were relatively favorable; page technical specifications, portal page specification, public relationship, patient data, general information and access roads, and financial services were inappropriate. Also, patient services, updating pages, public services, pharmaceutical services, research and education, and telemedicine were in a poor condition.Conclusion: Results of this study suggests that an appropriate model should contain 2 levels with 4 layers.Keywords: Private hospitals, Portals, Gap analysis, Conceptual model, Tehran city

  1. Nordfeldt S, Hanberger L, Bertero C. Patient and parent views on a Web 2.0 Diabetes Portal--the management tool, the generator, and the gatekeeper: qualitative study. J Med Internet Res. 2010;12(2):e17.
  2. Nordqvist C, Hanberger L, Timpka T, Nordfeldt S. Health professionals’ attitudes towards using a Web 2.0 portal for child and adolescent diabetes care: qualitative study. J Med Internet Res. 2009;11(2):e12.
  3. Lee CS, Goh DH-L, Chua AY-K. Evaluation of hospital portals using knowledge management mechanisms. Asian Digital Libraries Looking Back 10 Years and Forging New Frontiers: Springer; 2007. p. 15-23.
  4. Grossman JM, Bodenheimer TS, McKenzie K. Hospital-physician portals: the role of competition in driving clinical data exchange. Health Aff (Millwood). 2006;25(6):1629-36.
  5. Hoe-Lian Goh D, Yeow-Kuan Chua A, Luyt B, Sian Lee C. Knowledge access, creation and transfer in e-government portals. Online information review. 2008;32(3):348-69.
  6. Shepherd M, Zitner D, Watters C, editors. Medical portals: web-based access to medical information. System Sciences, 2000 Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Hawaii International Conference on; 2000. IEEE.
  7. McCord SK, Frederiksen L, Campbell N. An accessibility assessment of selected web-based health information resources. Library Hi Tech. 2002;20(2):188-98.
  8. Olsina L, Rossi G. Measuring Web application quality with WebQEM. Ieee Multimedia. 2002(4):20-9.
  9. Potter A. Accessibility of Alabama government web sites. Journal of Government Information. 2002;29(5):303-17.
  10. Sloan D, Gregor P, Booth P, Gibson L. Auditing accessibility of UK Higher Education web sites. Interacting with computers. 2002;14(4):313-25.
  11. Yu H. Web accessibility and the law: recommendations for implementation. Library Hi Tech. 2002;20(4):406-19.
  12. Accessibility of travel and transportation websites. [cited 2 July 2004]; Available from:
  13. Accessibility of bank websites in Spanish. 2004 [updated 2004; cited]; Available from:
  14. Kahraman C, Kaya T. A fuzzy approach to e-banking website quality assessment based on an integrated AHP-ELECTRE method. Technological and Economic Development of Economy. 2011(2):313-34.
  15. Williams R, Rattray R. An assessment of Web accessibility of UK accountancy firms. Managerial Auditing Journal. 2003;18(9):710-6.
  16. Williams R, Rattray R. UK and US hotel web content accessibility: Mandates for action. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management. 2005;17(1):78-87.
  17. Horri A, Ahmadi N. Evaluating central library websites of Iranian public university and proposing model to improve their quality. Journal of Education and psychology. 2009;39(1):41-62.
  18. Anh Tran L. Evaluation of community web sites: A case study of the Community Social Planning Council of Toronto web site. Online Information Review. 2009;33(1):96-116.
  19. Hassanzade M, Navidi F. Comparing usage of diverse methods in evaluating website accessibility (case study: Iranian ministry websites). Journal of information science research and public libraries. 2010;16(2):5-27.
  20. Keyhanpour A, ZareBidaki A, Mahmudi M, Azadnia M. Evaluating content of Iran web from the view point of electronic government. 12th Annual conference of Iranian computer assossiation; 2005; Tehran. 2005.
  21. Implementing Hospital Integrated System (HIS) 2011 [updated 2011; cited]; Available from:
  22. Lee CS, Goh DH-L, Chua AY. An analysis of knowledge management mechanisms in healthcare portals. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science. 2010;42(1):20-44.
  23. Llinas G, Rodriguez-Inesta D, Mira JJ, Lorenzo S, Aibar C. A comparison of websites from Spanish, American and British hospitals. Methods Inf Med. 2008;47(2):124-30.
  24. Teimourpour B. Research project of ranking Iranian hospital portals 2011. [cited]; Available from:
  25. Portal nodes and elements 2005. . [cited 17 J]; Available from:
  26. Jayakumar R, Mukhopadhyay B. Website quality assessment model (WQAM) for developing efficient e-learning framework-A novel approach. International Journal of Engineering and Technology (IJET). 2013;5(5):3770-80.
  27. Kosinska J, Slowikowski P. Technical aspects of portal technology application for e-health systems. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2004;105:12-20.
  28. Sampson D. Evaluation of Web Portals. Encyclopedia of portal technologies and applications. 2007:376-83