Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34485215›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health

Acceptability of COVID-19 Certificates: A Qualitative Study in Geneva, Switzerland, in 2020.

Vanessa Fargnoli, Mayssam Nehme, Idris Guessous, Claudine Burton-Jeangros

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Public views on the Covid-19 immunity certificate: A scoping review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

4 authors.

Vanessa FargnoliGeneva School of Social Sciences, Institute of Sociological Research, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Mayssam NehmeDivision and Department of Primary Care Medicine, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.
Idris GuessousFaculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Claudine Burton-JeangrosGeneva School of Social Sciences, Institute of Sociological Research, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Immunity certificates related to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) have been under discussion since the beginning of the pandemic with conflicting opinions. In order to identify arguments in favor of and against the possible implementation of documents certifying immunity of an individual based on serological testing, we developed a qualitative study in Geneva, Switzerland. The study took place between two lockdowns with a sense of semi-normalcy during summer 2020 in Switzerland but at a time when no vaccine was available and seroprevalence was below 21%. Eleven focus groups with members of the public and 14 semi-structured interviews with stakeholders were conducted between July and November 2020, with a total of 68 participants with an age range between 24 and 77 years. Interviews and focus groups transcripts were coded with the ATLAS.ti CAQDAS. Few participants considered immunity certificates based on serological testing as an acceptable public health measure. Major concerns included the reliability of scientific data related to COVID-19 immunity and serological testing potential re-infection as well as the possibility that the use of certificates could result in deleterious outcomes. Discrimination, counterfeiting, incitement for self-infection, invasion of the private sphere, violation of personal integrity, and violation of medical secrecy were perceived as the major risks. Benefits of immunity certificates were more perceived when in relation to vaccination, and included gains in medical knowledge and protection in certain contexts involving leisure or work-related activities. The consequences of implementing immunity certificates are numerous, and the acceptability by the general population has to be considered when engaging in such policy. Even if the results provide a snapshot of arguments discussed around immunity certificates based on serological testing before the implementation of the COVID-19 vaccine, most of the issues discussed are central in the current debates about vaccination certificates.

Indexed as

COVID-19AdultAgedCommunicable Disease ControlCOVID-19 VaccinesHumansMiddle AgedReproducibility of ResultsSARS-CoV-2Seroepidemiologic StudiesSwitzerlandYoung AdultCOVID-19 Vaccinesanti-SARS-CoV-2 serologyCOVID-19immunity certificatespublic health policyqualitative studysocial acceptability

Identifiers

PMID34485215
PMCPMC8416097

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.