Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34406960›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2021

Public Adoption of and Trust in the NHS COVID-19 Contact Tracing App in the United Kingdom: Quantitative Online Survey Study.

Liz Dowthwaite, Joel Fischer, Elvira Perez Vallejos, Virginia Portillo, Elena Nichele, Murray Goulden, Derek McAuley

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
18.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 75 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Widening or narrowing inequalities? The equity implications of digital tools to support COVID-19 contact tracing: A qualitative study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Liz DowthwaiteHorizon Digital Economy Research, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-9269-2849
Joel FischerSchool of Computer Science, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-8878-2454
Elvira Perez VallejosNational Intitute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre, Institute of Mental Health, Division of Psychiatry and Applied Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-0258-9440
Virginia PortilloHorizon Digital Economy Research, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-1981-3840
Elena NicheleHorizon Digital Economy Research, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-0755-1342
Murray GouldenSchool of Sociology and Social Policy, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-4005-8752
Derek McAuleyHorizon Digital Economy Research, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-9159-9933
University of Nottingham · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDigital contact tracing is employed to monitor and manage the spread of COVID-19. However, to be effective the system must be adopted by a substantial proportion of the population. Studies of mostly hypothetical contact tracing apps show generally high acceptance, but little is known about the drivers and barriers to adoption of deployed systems.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to investigate adoption of and attitudes toward the NHS (National Health Service) COVID-19 smartphone app, the digital contact tracing solution in the United Kingdom.

methodsAn online survey based on the extended Technology Acceptance Model with the added factor of trust was carried out with a representative sample of the UK population. Statistical analysis showed adoption rates, attitudes toward and trust in the app, and compliance with self-isolation advice and highlighted differences for vulnerable populations (ie, older adults aged 65 years and over and members of Black, Asian, and minority ethnic [BAME] communities).

resultsA total of 1001 participants took part in the study. Around half of the participants who had heard of the NHS COVID-19 mobile phone app (490/963, 50.9%; 95% CI 47.8%-54.0%) had downloaded and kept the app, but more than one-third (345/963, 35.8%; 95% CI 32.8%-38.8%) either did not intend to download it or had deleted it. Significantly more BAME respondents than White respondents had deleted the app (16/115, 13.9%; 95% CI 11.8%-16.0%, vs 65/876, 7.4%; 95% CI 5.8%-9.0%), and significantly more older adults 65 years and over than those under 65 years did not intend to download it (44/127, 34.6%; 95% CI 31.7%-37.5%, vs 220/874, 25.2%; 95% CI 22.5%-27.9%). Broadly, one of the reasons for uptake was to help the NHS and other people, especially among older adults, although significantly fewer BAME participants agreed that they did so to help the NHS. Reported compliance with received notifications to self-isolate was high but was significantly lower than reported intended compliance without received notifications. Only one-fifth (136/699, 19.5%; 95% CI 17.0%-22.0%) of participants understood that the decision to send self-isolation notifications was automated by the app. There were a range of significantly more negative views among BAME participants, including lower trust in the NHS, while older adults were often significantly more positive. Respondents without the app reported significantly lower trust and more negative views toward the app and were less likely to report that they understood how the app works.

conclusionsWhile compliance on the part of the approximately 50% of participants who had the app was fairly high, there were issues surrounding trust and understanding that hindered adoption and, therefore, the effectiveness of digital contact tracing, particularly among BAME communities. This study highlights that more needs to be done to improve adoption among groups who are more vulnerable to the effects of the virus in order to enhance uptake and acceptance of contact tracing apps.

Indexed as

COVID-19Mobile ApplicationsAgedContact TracingHumansSARS-CoV-2State MedicineSurveys and QuestionnairesTrustUnited KingdomattitudescompliancecoronavirusCOVID-19digital contact tracingdigital proximity tracingSARS-CoV-2technology adoptiontrustvulnerable populations

Identifiers

PMID34406960
PMCPMC8451731
OpenAlexW3180113882

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.