Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34697720›Full record

ArticleHealth care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy2022

Should Digital Contact Tracing Technologies be used to Control COVID-19? Perspectives from an Australian Public Deliberation.

Chris Degeling, Julie Hall, Jane Johnson, Roba Abbas, Shopna Bag, Gwendolyn L Gilbert

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
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

6 authors.

Chris DegelingAustralian Centre for Health Engagement, Evidence and Values, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia. degeling@uow.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4279-3443
Julie HallAustralian Centre for Health Engagement, Evidence and Values, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia.
Jane JohnsonDepartment of Philosophy, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.
Roba AbbasFaculty of Business and Law, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia.
Shopna BagWestern Sydney Local Health District, NSW Health, Sydney, Australia.
Gwendolyn L GilbertSydney Health Ethics, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council APP1083079
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mobile phone-based applications (apps) can promote faster targeted actions to control COVID-19. However, digital contact tracing systems raise concerns about data security, system effectiveness, and their potential to normalise privacy-invasive surveillance technologies. In the absence of mandates, public uptake depends on the acceptability and perceived legitimacy of using technologies that log interactions between individuals to build public health capacity. We report on six online deliberative workshops convened in New South Wales to consider the appropriateness of using the COVIDSafe app to enhance Australian contact tracing systems. All groups took the position (by majority) that the protections enacted in the app design and supporting legislation were appropriate. This support is contingent on several system attributes including: the voluntariness of the COVIDSafe app; that the system relies on proximity rather than location tracking; and, that data access is restricted to local public health practitioners undertaking contact tracing. Despite sustained scepticism in media coverage, there was an underlying willingness to trust Australian governing institutions such that in principle acceptance of the new contact tracing technology was easy to obtain. However, tensions between the need to prove system effectiveness through operational transparency and requirements for privacy protections could be limiting public uptake. Our study shows that informed citizens are willing to trade their privacy for common goods such as COVID-19 suppression. But low case numbers and cautionary public discourses can make trustworthiness difficult to establish because some will only do so when it can be demonstrated that the benefits justify the costs to individuals.

Indexed as

COVID-19Mobile ApplicationsAustraliaContact TracingHumansPrivacyAustraliaCOVIDSafe appDigital contact tracingPrivacyPublic deliberationPublic health surveillance

Identifiers

PMID34697720
PMCPMC8545621

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.