Search

This paper critically comments on the state of affairs in the UK relating to the pandemic and explores how a focus on inequities experienced by marginalized and vulnerable groups is necessary for exposing the material realties of everyday life, but also how such a focus has been hijacked by center right politics to distract us from collective responsibilities and building alliances for systemic change. The paper critically reviews the impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic on the most marginalized and vulnerable in UK society and highlights the interconnected risk factors of COVID‐19 and its secondary impacts to demonstrate how these are linked to political ideology, policy, and practice. We conclude with recommendations informed through a looking back at the key tenants and purposes of universal healthcare to apprise what is needed in this moment of crisis and beyond. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During the COVID-19 pandemic, digital contact-tracing has been employed in many countries to monitor and manage the spread of the disease. However, to be effective such a system must be adopted by a substantial proportion of the population; therefore, public trust plays a key role. This paper examines the NHS COVID-19 smartphone app, the digital contact-tracing solution in the UK. A series of interviews were carried out prior to the app's release (n = 12) and a large scale survey examining attitudes towards the app (n = 1,001) was carried out after release. Extending previous work reporting high level attitudes towards the app, this paper shows that prevailing negative attitudes prior to release persisted, and affected the subsequent use of the app. They also show significant relationships between trust, app features, and the wider social and societal context. There is lower trust amongst non-users of the app and trust correlates to many other aspects of the app, a lack of trust could hinder adoption and effectiveness of digital contact-tracing. The design of technology requiring wide uptake, e.g., for public health, should embed considerations of the complexities of trust and the context in which the technology will be used. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In order to combat the COVID-19 pandemic, policymakers around the globe have increasingly invested in digital health technologies to support the 'test, track and trace' approach of containing the spread of the novel coronavirus. These technologies include mobile 'contact tracing' applications (apps), which can trace individuals likely to have come into contact with those who have reported symptoms or tested positive for the virus and request that they self-isolate. This paper takes a critical public health perspective that advocates for 'genuine participation' in public health interventions and emphasises the need to take citizen's knowledge into account during public health decision-making. In doing so, it presents and discusses the findings of a UK interview study that explored public views on the possibility of using a COVID-19 contact-tracing app public health intervention at the time the United Kingdom (UK) Government announced their decision to develop such a technology. Findings illustrated interviewees' range and degree of understandings, misconceptions, and concerns about the possibility of using an app. In particular, concerns about privacy and surveillance predominated. Interviewees associated these concerns much more broadly than health by identifying with pre-existent British national narratives associated with individual liberty and autonomy. In extending and contributing to ongoing sociological research with public health, we argue that understanding and responding to these matters is vital, and that our findings demonstrate the need for a forward-looking, anticipatory strategy for public engagement as part of the responsible innovation of the COVID-19 contact-tracing app in the UK. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The UK's National Health Service (NHS) COVID-19 contact tracing app was announced to the British public on 12th April 2020. The UK government endorsed the app as a public health intervention that would improve public health, protect the NHS and 'save lives'. On 5th May 2020 the technology was released for trial on the Isle of Wight. However, the trial was halted in June 2020, reportedly due to technological issues. The app was later remodelled and launched to the public in September 2020. The rapid development, trial and discontinuation of the app over a short period of a few months meant that the mobilisation and effect of the discourses associated with the app could be traced relatively easily. In this paper we aimed to explore how these discourses were constructed in the media, and their effect on actors – in particular, those who developed and those who trialled the app. Promissory discourses were prevalent, the trajectory of which aligned with theories developed in the sociology of expectations. We describe this trajectory, and then interpret its implications in terms of infectious disease public health practices and responsibilities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores ethical debates associated with the UK COVID-19 contact tracing app that occurred in the public news media and broader public policy, and in doing so, takes ethics debate as an object for sociological study. The research question was: how did UK national newspaper news articles and grey literature frame the ethical issues about the app, and how did stakeholders associated with the development and/or governance of the app reflect on this? We examined the predominance of different ethical issues in news articles and grey literature, and triangulated this using stakeholder interview data. Findings illustrate how news articles exceptionalised ethical debate around the app compared to the way they portrayed ethical issues relating to 'manual' contact tracing. They also narrowed the debate around specific privacy concerns. This was reflected in the grey literature, and interviewees perceived this to have emerged from a 'privacy lobby'. We discuss the findings, and argue that this limited public ethics narrative masked broader ethical issues. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) presents a severe and urgent threat to global health. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, many countries have implemented nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs), including national workplace and school closures, personal protection, social distancing, contact tracing, testing, home quarantine, and isolation. To evaluate the effectiveness of these NPIs in mitigating the spread of early COVID-19 and predict the epidemic trend in the United Kingdom, we developed a compartmental model to mimic the transmission with time-varying transmission rate, contact rate, disease-induced mortality rate, proportion of quarantined close contacts, and hospitalization rate. The model was fitted to the number of confirmed new cases and daily number of deaths in five stages with a Markov Chain Monte Carlo method. We quantified the effectiveness of NPIs and found that if the transmission rate, contact rate, and hospitalization rate were approximately equal to those in the second stage of the most strict NPIs, and the proportion of quarantined close contacts increased by 3%, then the epidemic would die out as early as January 12, 2021, with around 1,533,000 final cumulative number of confirmed cases, and around 55,610 final cumulative number of deaths. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The COVID‐19 pandemic put governments under pressure to make radical and urgent decisions, and to implement new digital solutions to steer society and deliver public services. Our study analyzes social media discourse to understand the co‐production of a digital public service in an emergency situation. Empirically, we mobilize Twitter netnography and discourse analysis to examine citizens' perceptions of the contact tracing app (CTA) introduced by the UK government to tackle the pandemic and save lives. Our study contributes to research on public sector accountability for digital transformations by advancing scholarly understanding of how societal concerns and public perceptions impact the co‐production of digital services. Our findings reveal a high level of public skepticism toward the app and a general distrust of the UK government among the main social challenges of the CTA's implementation. Furthermore, we evidence widespread public distress over the potential violation of democratic freedoms and misuse of the data collected by the app. Finally, we reflect on the linkages between the lack of governmental accountability and the difficulties in mitigating the expressed societal concerns, causing a corresponding resistance on the part of the public to engage in and support co‐production. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aimed to assess (i) COVID‐19 transmission prior to and following spectator events and (ii) methodological approaches to capturing event‐related transmission during the spectator return. Local authority population transmission rates were used to identify higher transmission areas, which were excluded from participant attendance following registration. Using observational online and SMS questionnaires, self‐reported COVID‐19 diagnoses (positive tests) and racing‐related NHS Test and Trace contacts within 14 days of spectating were reported for two British Horseracing events and three Point to Point (PTP) grassroots races. There were 1,477 registrations for the British Horseracing events, and 1,678 registrations for PTP races. Responses were received from 464 attendees of British Horseracing events (31.4% response rate). Two attendees reported a COVID‐19 diagnosis, and no attendees reported NHS Test and Trace contact. From PTP races, 862 attendees (51.3%) consented to receive the SMS survey, and responses were received from 495 attendees (57.4% response rate). Five attendees reported positive COVID‐19 diagnoses, and two attendees reported being contacted by NHS Test and Trace, of which one was following a non‐racing potential COVID‐19 exposure. There was limited evidence of COVID‐19 transmission at outdoor elite and grassroots level horseracing events during autumn 2020. A higher response rate was received with SMS surveys; however, there was a reluctancy to "opt in" to SMS methodology. This study describes different methodological approaches to monitoring COVID‐19 transmission risk at events, which may have relevance for other sporting and event contexts during the current pandemic, and sustained attendances during periods with circulating transmissible diseases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Public perceptions of pandemic viral threats and government policies can influence adherence to containment, delay, and mitigation policies such as physical distancing, hygienic practices, use of physical barriers, uptake of testing, contact tracing, and vaccination programs. The UK COVID-19 Public Experiences (COPE) study aims to identify determinants of health behaviour using the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation (COM-B) model using a longitudinal mixed-methods approach. Here, we provide a detailed description of the demographic and self-reported health characteristics of the COPE cohort at baseline assessment, an overview of data collected, and plans for follow-up of the cohort. The COPE baseline survey was completed by 11,113 UK adult residents (18+ years of age). Baseline data collection started on the 13th of March 2020 (10-days before the introduction of the first national COVID-19 lockdown in the UK) and finished on the 13th of April 2020. Participants were recruited via the HealthWise Wales (HWW) research registry and through social media snowballing and advertising (Facebook®, Twitter®, Instagram®). Participants were predominantly female (69%), over 50 years of age (68%), identified as white (98%), and were living with their partner (68%). A large proportion (67%) had a college/university level education, and half reported a pre-existing health condition (50%). Initial follow-up plans for the cohort included in-depth surveys at 3-months and 12-months after the first UK national lockdown to assess short and medium-term effects of the pandemic on health behaviour and subjective health and well-being. Additional consent will be sought from participants at follow-up for data linkage and surveys at 18 and 24-months after the initial UK national lockdown. A large non-random sample was recruited to the COPE cohort during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, which will enable longitudinal analysis of the determinants of health behaviour and changes in subjective health and well-being over the course of the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We tested the link between COVID‐19 conspiracy theories and health protective behaviours in three studies: one at the onset of the pandemic in the United Kingdom (UK), a second just before the first national lockdown, and a third during that lockdown (N = 302, 404 and 399). We focused on conspiracy theories that did not deny the existence of COVID‐19 and evaluated the extent to which they predicted a range of health protective behaviours, before and after controlling for psychological and sociodemographic characteristics associated with conspiracy theory belief. COVID‐19 conspiracy beliefs were positively correlated with beliefs in other unrelated conspiracies and a general conspiracy mind‐set, and negatively correlated with trust in government and a tendency towards analytical thinking (vs. intuitive thinking). Unexpectedly, COVID‐19 conspiracy believers adhered to basic health guidelines and advanced health protective measures as strictly as non‐believers. Conspiracy believers were, however, less willing to install the contact‐tracing app, get tested for and vaccinated against COVID‐19, and were more likely to share COVID‐19 misinformation—all of which might undermine public health initiatives. Study 3 showed conspiracy theory believers were less willing to undertake health protective behaviours that were outside of their personal control, perceiving these as having a negative balance of risks and benefits. We discuss models explaining conspiracy beliefs and health protective behaviours, and suggest practical recommendations for public health initiatives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]