Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/24448
Full metadata record
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Niculaescu, C-E | - |
dc.contributor.author | Sassoon, I | - |
dc.contributor.author | Landa-Avila, C | - |
dc.contributor.author | Colak, O | - |
dc.contributor.author | Jun, GT | - |
dc.contributor.author | Balatsoukas, P | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2022-04-13T15:24:02Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2022-04-13T15:24:02Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2022-04-15 | - |
dc.identifier | e058317 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | Niculaescu, C.-E., Sassoon, I., Landa-Avila, C., Colak, O., Jun, G.T. and Balatsoukas, P. (2022) 'Why ‘one size fits all’ is not enough when designing COVID-19 immunity certificates for domestic use: a UK-wide cross-sectional online survey', BMJ Open, 12, e058317, pp. 1 - 12 (+ 1 pp. supplemental material). doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-058317. | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | https://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/24448 | - |
dc.description | Corina-Elena Niculaescu ORCID 0000-0002-8971-0812; Isabel Karen Sassoon ORCID 0000-0002-8685-1054; Irma Cecilia Landa-Avila ORCID 0000-0001-6107-6736; Ozlem Colak ORCID 0000-0003-0813-2561; Gyuchan Thomas Jun ORCID 0000-0002-0958-0107; Panagiotis Balatsoukas ORCID 0000-0002-2454-0816. | en_US |
dc.description | Data availability statement: Data are available in a public, open access repository. Data are available in the project Open Science Framework (OSF) repository (https://osf.io/jubv6/). Supplemental material: This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. | - |
dc.description.abstract | Copyright information: © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Objectives: The present study explored public’s willingness to use COVID-19 immunity certificates across six different domestic scenarios. Design: Cross-sectional online survey. Setting: UK representative survey conducted on 3 August 2021. Participants 534 UK residents over 18 years old. Interventions: Participants replied to the same set of questions. Primary and secondary outcome measures: The primary outcome measure was willingness to use immunity certificates across three different domestic settings: (1) visiting the general practitioner (GP) for a non-urgent health issue; (2) dining in a restaurant and (3) attending a performance in a theatre. For each setting two options, one prioritising convenience (option A) and the other privacy (option B), were offered. Our secondary outcome measures were computed indices from items adapted from the Health Belief Model; attitudes towards sharing immunity status with service providers; prior to COVID-19 lifestyle. In addition, we recorded data about respondents’ sociodemographic characteristics. Results: Respondents were more willing to use immunity certificates that prioritised convenience (92%), rather than privacy (76%), when visiting their GP . However, privacy was more favourable in the other two settings (dining in a restaurant (84%) and going to a theatre (83%)) compared with convenience (38% and 39% respectively). Personal beliefs about COVID-19 and immunity certificates were associated with variations in willingness to use these across all scenarios. No variations were observed across sociodemographics and lifestyle. Conclusions: The findings of this survey suggest that there is not one-size-fits-all solution for designing immunity certificates. Immunity certificates are complex sociotechnical systems, any attempt to implement these for domestic use should be tailored to different settings and user needs. The design of certification services requires a more evidence-based approach and further research is needed to understand how different settings, design elements (like convenience or privacy) and personal beliefs about the pandemic should inform their design. | - |
dc.description.sponsorship | IMMUNE or Immunity Passport Service Design is a nine-month project funded by the AHRC/UKRI COVID-19 Rapid Response (Ref. AH/W000288/1). | en_US |
dc.format.extent | 1 - 12 (+ 1 pp. supplemental material) | - |
dc.format.medium | Electronic | - |
dc.language.iso | en | en_US |
dc.publisher | BMJ Publishing Group | en_US |
dc.rights | Copyright information: © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ. This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. | - |
dc.rights.uri | https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ | - |
dc.subject | COVID-19 | en_US |
dc.subject | service design | en_US |
dc.subject | public health | en_US |
dc.subject | vaccine certificates | en_US |
dc.subject | immunity certificates | en_US |
dc.subject | survey | en_US |
dc.title | Why ‘one size fits all’ is not enough when designing COVID-19 immunity certificates for domestic use: a UK-wide cross-sectional online survey | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
dc.identifier.doi | https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-058317 | - |
dc.relation.isPartOf | BMJ Open | - |
pubs.publication-status | Published | - |
pubs.volume | 12 | - |
dc.identifier.eissn | 2044-6055 | - |
Appears in Collections: | Dept of Computer Science Research Papers |
Files in This Item:
File | Description | Size | Format | |
---|---|---|---|---|
FullText.pdf | 1.04 MB | Adobe PDF | View/Open |
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License