Mixed-methods exploration of views on choice in a university asymptomatic COVID-19 testing programme.
Authors
Ansari, Akbar
McLaughlin, Meredith
van der Scheer, Jan W
Bousfield, Jennifer
George, Jenny
Leach, Brandi
Parkinson, Sarah
Dixon-Woods, Mary
Publication Date
2022-05Journal Title
Bioethics
ISSN
0269-9702
Publisher
Wiley
Language
en
Type
Article
This Version
AO
VoR
Metadata
Show full item recordCitation
Cox, C., Ansari, A., McLaughlin, M., van der Scheer, J. W., Bousfield, J., George, J., Leach, B., et al. (2022). Mixed-methods exploration of views on choice in a university asymptomatic COVID-19 testing programme.. Bioethics https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.13012
Description
Funder: Wellcome Trust
Funder: Healthcare Improvement Studies Institute (THIS Institute), University of Cambridge
Funder: Health Foundation; Id: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000724
Abstract
Asymptomatic COVID-19 testing programmes are being introduced in higher education institutions, but stakeholder views regarding the acceptability of mandating or incentivizing participation remain little understood. A mixed-method study (semi-structured interviews and a survey including open and closed questions) was undertaken in a case study university with a student testing programme. Survey data were analysed descriptively; analysis for interviews was based on the framework method. Two hundred and thirty-nine people participated in the study: 213 in the survey (189 students, 24 staff), and 26 in interviews (19 students, 7 staff). There was majority (62%) but not universal support for voluntary participation, with a range of concerns expressed about the potentially negative effects of mandating testing. Those who supported mandatory testing tended to do so on the grounds that it would protect others. There was also majority (64%) opposition to penalties for refusing to test. Views on restricting access to face-to-face teaching for non-participants were polarized. Three-quarters (75%) supported incentives, though there were some concerns about effectiveness and unintended consequences. Participants emphasized the importance of communication about the potential benefits of testing. Preserving the voluntariness of participation in student asymptomatic testing programmes is likely to be the most ethically sound policy unless circumstances change.
Keywords
COVID‐19, bioethics, education, mixed‐methods, public health, testing
Sponsorship
Caitriona Cox, lead researcher, is a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) academic clinical fellow. This study is funded by Mary Dixon-Woods’ NIHR Senior Investigator award (NF-SI-0617-10026), by the Wellcome Trust through a contract award for a project on ethical issues in COVID-19 testing, and by The Healthcare Improvement Studies Institute (THIS Institute), University of Cambridge. THIS Institute is supported by the Health Foundation, an independent charity committed to bringing about better health and healthcare for people in the UK.
Funder references
Health Foundation (unknown)
Department of Health (via National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)) (NF-SI-0617-10026)
Identifiers
bioe13012
External DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.13012
This record's URL: https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/334515
Rights
Licence:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Statistics
Total file downloads (since January 2020). For more information on metrics see the
IRUS guide.
Recommended or similar items
The current recommendation prototype on the Apollo Repository will be turned off on 03 February 2023. Although the pilot has been fruitful for both parties, the service provider IKVA is focusing on horizon scanning products and so the recommender service can no longer be supported. We recognise the importance of recommender services in supporting research discovery and are evaluating offerings from other service providers. If you would like to offer feedback on this decision please contact us on: support@repository.cam.ac.uk