Acceptability of App-Based Contact Tracing for COVID-19: Cross-Country Survey Study.
Adolescent
Adult
Aged
COVID-19
Contact Tracing
/ methods
Coronavirus Infections
/ epidemiology
Cross-Cultural Comparison
Female
France
/ epidemiology
Germany
/ epidemiology
Humans
Intention
Italy
/ epidemiology
Male
Middle Aged
Mobile Applications
Pandemics
/ prevention & control
Pneumonia, Viral
/ epidemiology
Surveys and Questionnaires
United Kingdom
/ epidemiology
United States
/ epidemiology
Young Adult
COVID-19
app
contact tracing
digital
epidemiology
mHealth
proximity tracing
user acceptability
Journal
JMIR mHealth and uHealth
ISSN: 2291-5222
Titre abrégé: JMIR Mhealth Uhealth
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 101624439
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
28 08 2020
28 08 2020
Historique:
received:
04
05
2020
accepted:
24
07
2020
revised:
29
06
2020
pubmed:
8
8
2020
medline:
5
9
2020
entrez:
8
8
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The COVID-19 pandemic is the greatest public health crisis of the last 100 years. Countries have responded with various levels of lockdown to save lives and stop health systems from being overwhelmed. At the same time, lockdowns entail large socioeconomic costs. One exit strategy under consideration is a mobile phone app that traces the close contacts of those infected with COVID-19. Recent research has demonstrated the theoretical effectiveness of this solution in different disease settings. However, concerns have been raised about such apps because of the potential privacy implications. This could limit the acceptability of app-based contact tracing in the general population. As the effectiveness of this approach increases strongly with app uptake, it is crucial to understand public support for this intervention. The objective of this study is to investigate the user acceptability of a contact-tracing app in five countries hit by the pandemic. We conducted a largescale, multicountry study (N=5995) to measure public support for the digital contact tracing of COVID-19 infections. We ran anonymous online surveys in France, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom, and the United States. We measured intentions to use a contact-tracing app across different installation regimes (voluntary installation vs automatic installation by mobile phone providers) and studied how these intentions vary across individuals and countries. We found strong support for the app under both regimes, in all countries, across all subgroups of the population, and irrespective of regional-level COVID-19 mortality rates. We investigated the main factors that may hinder or facilitate uptake and found that concerns about cybersecurity and privacy, together with a lack of trust in the government, are the main barriers to adoption. Epidemiological evidence shows that app-based contact tracing can suppress the spread of COVID-19 if a high enough proportion of the population uses the app and that it can still reduce the number of infections if uptake is moderate. Our findings show that the willingness to install the app is very high. The available evidence suggests that app-based contact tracing may be a viable approach to control the diffusion of COVID-19.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The COVID-19 pandemic is the greatest public health crisis of the last 100 years. Countries have responded with various levels of lockdown to save lives and stop health systems from being overwhelmed. At the same time, lockdowns entail large socioeconomic costs. One exit strategy under consideration is a mobile phone app that traces the close contacts of those infected with COVID-19. Recent research has demonstrated the theoretical effectiveness of this solution in different disease settings. However, concerns have been raised about such apps because of the potential privacy implications. This could limit the acceptability of app-based contact tracing in the general population. As the effectiveness of this approach increases strongly with app uptake, it is crucial to understand public support for this intervention.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this study is to investigate the user acceptability of a contact-tracing app in five countries hit by the pandemic.
METHODS
We conducted a largescale, multicountry study (N=5995) to measure public support for the digital contact tracing of COVID-19 infections. We ran anonymous online surveys in France, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom, and the United States. We measured intentions to use a contact-tracing app across different installation regimes (voluntary installation vs automatic installation by mobile phone providers) and studied how these intentions vary across individuals and countries.
RESULTS
We found strong support for the app under both regimes, in all countries, across all subgroups of the population, and irrespective of regional-level COVID-19 mortality rates. We investigated the main factors that may hinder or facilitate uptake and found that concerns about cybersecurity and privacy, together with a lack of trust in the government, are the main barriers to adoption.
CONCLUSIONS
Epidemiological evidence shows that app-based contact tracing can suppress the spread of COVID-19 if a high enough proportion of the population uses the app and that it can still reduce the number of infections if uptake is moderate. Our findings show that the willingness to install the app is very high. The available evidence suggests that app-based contact tracing may be a viable approach to control the diffusion of COVID-19.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32759102
pii: v8i8e19857
doi: 10.2196/19857
pmc: PMC7458659
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e19857Subventions
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : P2C HD041041
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
©Samuel Altmann, Luke Milsom, Hannah Zillessen, Raffaele Blasone, Frederic Gerdon, Ruben Bach, Frauke Kreuter, Daniele Nosenzo, Séverine Toussaert, Johannes Abeler. Originally published in JMIR mHealth and uHealth (http://mhealth.jmir.org), 28.08.2020.
Références
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2020 Apr 20;8(4):e19359
pubmed: 32294052
Science. 2020 May 8;368(6491):
pubmed: 32234805
Lancet Public Health. 2020 May;5(5):e271-e278
pubmed: 32251626
Science. 2003 Nov 21;302(5649):1338-9
pubmed: 14631022
Public Opin Q. 2019 Jul;83(Suppl 1):210-235
pubmed: 31337924
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015 Feb 24;112(8):2395-400
pubmed: 25646415
Lancet Public Health. 2020 May;5(5):e279-e288
pubmed: 32311320