Cargando…
Public attitudes to a human challenge study with SARS-CoV-2: a mixed-methods study
Background: Human challenge studies involve the deliberate exposure of healthy volunteers to an infectious micro-organism in a highly controlled and monitored way. They are used to understand infectious diseases and have contributed to the development of vaccines. In early 2020, the UK started explo...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
F1000 Research Limited
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8921687/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35321005 http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/wellcomeopenres.17516.1 |
_version_ | 1784669373419487232 |
---|---|
author | Barker, Caroline Collet, Katharine Gbesemete, Diane Piggin, Maria Watson, Daniella Pristerà, Philippa Lawerence, Wendy Smith, Emma Bahrami-Hessari, Michael Johnson, Halle Baker, Katherine Qavi, Ambar McGrath, Carmel Chiu, Christopher Read, Robert C. Ward, Helen |
author_facet | Barker, Caroline Collet, Katharine Gbesemete, Diane Piggin, Maria Watson, Daniella Pristerà, Philippa Lawerence, Wendy Smith, Emma Bahrami-Hessari, Michael Johnson, Halle Baker, Katherine Qavi, Ambar McGrath, Carmel Chiu, Christopher Read, Robert C. Ward, Helen |
author_sort | Barker, Caroline |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background: Human challenge studies involve the deliberate exposure of healthy volunteers to an infectious micro-organism in a highly controlled and monitored way. They are used to understand infectious diseases and have contributed to the development of vaccines. In early 2020, the UK started exploring the feasibility of establishing a human challenge study with SARS-CoV-2. Given the significant public interest and the complexity of the potential risks and benefits, it is vital that public views are considered in the design and approval of any such study and that investigators and ethics boards remain accountable to the public. Methods: Mixed methods study comprising online surveys conducted with 2,441 UK adults and in-depth virtual focus groups with 57 UK adults during October 2020 to explore the public’s attitudes to a human challenge study with SARS-CoV-2 taking place in the UK. Results: There was overall agreement across the surveys and focus groups that a human challenge study with SARS-CoV-2 should take place in the UK. Transparency of information, trust and the necessity to provide clear information on potential risks to study human challenge study participants were important. The perceived risks of taking part included the risk of developing long-term effects from COVID, impact on personal commitments and mental health implications of isolation. There were a number of practical realities to taking part that would influence a volunteer’s ability to participate (e.g. Wi-Fi, access to exercise, outside space and work, family and pet commitments). Conclusions: The results identified practical considerations for teams designing human challenge studies. Recommendations were grouped: 1) messaging to potential study participants, 2) review of the protocol and organisation of the study, and 3) more broadly, making the study more inclusive and relevant. This study highlights the value of public consultation in research, particularly in fields attracting public interest and scrutiny . |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8921687 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | F1000 Research Limited |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-89216872022-03-22 Public attitudes to a human challenge study with SARS-CoV-2: a mixed-methods study Barker, Caroline Collet, Katharine Gbesemete, Diane Piggin, Maria Watson, Daniella Pristerà, Philippa Lawerence, Wendy Smith, Emma Bahrami-Hessari, Michael Johnson, Halle Baker, Katherine Qavi, Ambar McGrath, Carmel Chiu, Christopher Read, Robert C. Ward, Helen Wellcome Open Res Research Article Background: Human challenge studies involve the deliberate exposure of healthy volunteers to an infectious micro-organism in a highly controlled and monitored way. They are used to understand infectious diseases and have contributed to the development of vaccines. In early 2020, the UK started exploring the feasibility of establishing a human challenge study with SARS-CoV-2. Given the significant public interest and the complexity of the potential risks and benefits, it is vital that public views are considered in the design and approval of any such study and that investigators and ethics boards remain accountable to the public. Methods: Mixed methods study comprising online surveys conducted with 2,441 UK adults and in-depth virtual focus groups with 57 UK adults during October 2020 to explore the public’s attitudes to a human challenge study with SARS-CoV-2 taking place in the UK. Results: There was overall agreement across the surveys and focus groups that a human challenge study with SARS-CoV-2 should take place in the UK. Transparency of information, trust and the necessity to provide clear information on potential risks to study human challenge study participants were important. The perceived risks of taking part included the risk of developing long-term effects from COVID, impact on personal commitments and mental health implications of isolation. There were a number of practical realities to taking part that would influence a volunteer’s ability to participate (e.g. Wi-Fi, access to exercise, outside space and work, family and pet commitments). Conclusions: The results identified practical considerations for teams designing human challenge studies. Recommendations were grouped: 1) messaging to potential study participants, 2) review of the protocol and organisation of the study, and 3) more broadly, making the study more inclusive and relevant. This study highlights the value of public consultation in research, particularly in fields attracting public interest and scrutiny . F1000 Research Limited 2022-02-10 /pmc/articles/PMC8921687/ /pubmed/35321005 http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/wellcomeopenres.17516.1 Text en Copyright: © 2022 Barker C et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Barker, Caroline Collet, Katharine Gbesemete, Diane Piggin, Maria Watson, Daniella Pristerà, Philippa Lawerence, Wendy Smith, Emma Bahrami-Hessari, Michael Johnson, Halle Baker, Katherine Qavi, Ambar McGrath, Carmel Chiu, Christopher Read, Robert C. Ward, Helen Public attitudes to a human challenge study with SARS-CoV-2: a mixed-methods study |
title | Public attitudes to a human challenge study with SARS-CoV-2: a mixed-methods study |
title_full | Public attitudes to a human challenge study with SARS-CoV-2: a mixed-methods study |
title_fullStr | Public attitudes to a human challenge study with SARS-CoV-2: a mixed-methods study |
title_full_unstemmed | Public attitudes to a human challenge study with SARS-CoV-2: a mixed-methods study |
title_short | Public attitudes to a human challenge study with SARS-CoV-2: a mixed-methods study |
title_sort | public attitudes to a human challenge study with sars-cov-2: a mixed-methods study |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8921687/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35321005 http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/wellcomeopenres.17516.1 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT barkercaroline publicattitudestoahumanchallengestudywithsarscov2amixedmethodsstudy AT colletkatharine publicattitudestoahumanchallengestudywithsarscov2amixedmethodsstudy AT gbesemetediane publicattitudestoahumanchallengestudywithsarscov2amixedmethodsstudy AT pigginmaria publicattitudestoahumanchallengestudywithsarscov2amixedmethodsstudy AT watsondaniella publicattitudestoahumanchallengestudywithsarscov2amixedmethodsstudy AT pristeraphilippa publicattitudestoahumanchallengestudywithsarscov2amixedmethodsstudy AT lawerencewendy publicattitudestoahumanchallengestudywithsarscov2amixedmethodsstudy AT smithemma publicattitudestoahumanchallengestudywithsarscov2amixedmethodsstudy AT bahramihessarimichael publicattitudestoahumanchallengestudywithsarscov2amixedmethodsstudy AT johnsonhalle publicattitudestoahumanchallengestudywithsarscov2amixedmethodsstudy AT bakerkatherine publicattitudestoahumanchallengestudywithsarscov2amixedmethodsstudy AT qaviambar publicattitudestoahumanchallengestudywithsarscov2amixedmethodsstudy AT mcgrathcarmel publicattitudestoahumanchallengestudywithsarscov2amixedmethodsstudy AT chiuchristopher publicattitudestoahumanchallengestudywithsarscov2amixedmethodsstudy AT readrobertc publicattitudestoahumanchallengestudywithsarscov2amixedmethodsstudy AT wardhelen publicattitudestoahumanchallengestudywithsarscov2amixedmethodsstudy |