Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

“Immunity Passports” for SARS-CoV-2: an online experimental study of the impact of antibody test terminology on perceived risk and behaviour

Jo Waller, G. James Rubin, Henry W. W. Potts, Abi Mottershaw, View ORCID ProfileTheresa M Marteau
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.05.06.20093401
Jo Waller
1Reader in Cancer Behavioural Science, School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King’s College London, Guy’s Hospital, Great Maze Pond, London, SE1 9RT
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
G. James Rubin
2Reader in the Psychology of Emerging Health Risks. Department of Psychological Medicine, King’s College London, Weston Education Centre, Cutcombe Road, London, SE5 9RJ
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Henry W. W. Potts
3Associate Professor, Institute of Health Informatics, University College London, 222 Euston Road London, NW1 2DA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Abi Mottershaw
4Online Experiments Lead. Behavioural Insights Team, 4 Matthew Parker Street, London, SW1H 9NP
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Theresa M Marteau
5Director of Research, Behaviour and Health Research Unit, University of Cambridge, Institute of Public Health, Forvie Site, Robinson Way, Cambridge, CB2 0SR
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Theresa M Marteau
  • For correspondence: tm388@cam.ac.uk
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ON THIS TOPIC

  • Test results indicating the presence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 are often referred to as Immunity Passports or Certificates.

  • Due to the limitations of such tests, including uncertainty about the duration of immunity conferred by detected antibodies, those receiving results indicating the presence of antibodies retain a risk of becoming infected by SARS-CoV-2.

  • It is unknown whether the use of the terms Immunity Passports or Certificates reduces awareness of the residual risk inherent in an antibody-positive test result and adherence to protective behaviours, thereby increasing risk of transmission.

WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS

  • Using the term Immunity - as opposed to Antibody - to describe antibody tests for SARS-CoV-2 more than doubled the proportion who erroneously perceived they would have no risk of catching coronavirus in the future given an antibody-positive test result, from 9.8% for Antibody to 19.1% for Immunity.

  • Perceiving no risk of infection with coronavirus given an antibody-positive test result was associated with an intention to wash hands less frequently.

  • Using the terms Passport, Certificate or Test had no significant effect.

Objective: To assess the impact of describing an antibody-positive test result using the terms Immunity and Passport or Certificate, alone or in combination, on perceived risk of becoming infected with SARS-CoV-2 and intention to continue protective behaviours.

Design: 2 × 3 experimental design.

Setting: Online with data collected between 28th April and 1st May 2020.

Participants: 1,204 adults registered with a UK research panel.

Intervention: Participants were randomised to receive one of six descriptions of an antibody test and results showing SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, differing in the terms used to describe the type of test (Immunity vs Antibody) and the test result (Passport vs Certificate vs Test).

Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was the proportion of participants perceiving no risk of becoming infected with SARS-CoV-2 given an antibody positive test result. Other outcomes include intended changes to frequency of handwashing and physical distancing.

Results: When using the term Immunity (vs Antibody), 19.1% of participants [95% CI: 16.1 to 22.5] (vs 9.8% [95% CI: 7.5 to 12.4]) perceived no risk of catching coronavirus at some point in the future given an antibody-positive test result (AOR: 2.91 [95% CI: 1.52 to 5.55]). Using the terms Passport or Certificate – as opposed to Test – had no significant effect (AOR: 1.24 [95% CI: 0.62 to 2.48] and AOR: 0.96 [95% CI: 0.47 to 1.99] respectively). There was no significant interaction between the effects of the test and result terminology. Across groups, perceiving no risk of infection was associated with an intention to wash hands less frequently (AOR: 2.32 [95% CI: 1.25 to 4.28]) but there was no significant association with intended avoidance of physical contact with others outside of the home (AOR: 1.37 [95% CI: 0.93-2.03]).

Conclusions: Using the term Immunity (vs Antibody) to describe antibody tests for SARS-CoV-2 increases the proportion of people believing that an antibody-positive result means they have no risk of catching coronavirus in the future, a perception that may be associated with less frequent handwashing. The way antibody testing is described may have implications for the likely impact of testing on transmission rates.

Study registration: Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/tjw78/files/

Competing Interest Statement

All authors have completed the Unified Competing Interest form (available on request from the corresponding author) and declare: no support from any organisation for the submitted work; and no financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years. HWWP declares consultancy fees from Babylon Health; all authors declare no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.

Clinical Trial

Protocol and plan of analysis were pre-registered on the Open Science Framework https://osf.io/tjwz8/ Study 2

Funding Statement

Data collection for this study was funded by a block UK government grant to the Behavioural Insights Team. JW is funded by a career development fellowship from Cancer Research UK (ref C7492/A17219). GJR is funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit (NIHR HPRU) in Emergency Preparedness and Response at King’s College London in partnership with Public Health England (PHE), in collaboration with the University of East Anglia. The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and not necessarily those of UK government, Cancer Research UK, NIHR or Public Health England.

Author Declarations

All relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.

Yes

All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.

Yes

Data Availability

Anonymised data will be made available upon reasonable request.

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted May 10, 2020.
Download PDF
Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
“Immunity Passports” for SARS-CoV-2: an online experimental study of the impact of antibody test terminology on perceived risk and behaviour
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
“Immunity Passports” for SARS-CoV-2: an online experimental study of the impact of antibody test terminology on perceived risk and behaviour
Jo Waller, G. James Rubin, Henry W. W. Potts, Abi Mottershaw, Theresa M Marteau
medRxiv 2020.05.06.20093401; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.05.06.20093401
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
“Immunity Passports” for SARS-CoV-2: an online experimental study of the impact of antibody test terminology on perceived risk and behaviour
Jo Waller, G. James Rubin, Henry W. W. Potts, Abi Mottershaw, Theresa M Marteau
medRxiv 2020.05.06.20093401; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.05.06.20093401

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Public and Global Health
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (215)
  • Allergy and Immunology (495)
  • Anesthesia (106)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (1096)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (196)
  • Dermatology (141)
  • Emergency Medicine (274)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (500)
  • Epidemiology (9766)
  • Forensic Medicine (5)
  • Gastroenterology (480)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (2308)
  • Geriatric Medicine (222)
  • Health Economics (462)
  • Health Informatics (1558)
  • Health Policy (735)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (603)
  • Hematology (236)
  • HIV/AIDS (503)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (11641)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (617)
  • Medical Education (237)
  • Medical Ethics (67)
  • Nephrology (257)
  • Neurology (2142)
  • Nursing (134)
  • Nutrition (336)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (426)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (517)
  • Oncology (1176)
  • Ophthalmology (364)
  • Orthopedics (128)
  • Otolaryngology (220)
  • Pain Medicine (146)
  • Palliative Medicine (50)
  • Pathology (311)
  • Pediatrics (695)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (300)
  • Primary Care Research (267)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (2180)
  • Public and Global Health (4655)
  • Radiology and Imaging (777)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (457)
  • Respiratory Medicine (623)
  • Rheumatology (274)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (225)
  • Sports Medicine (210)
  • Surgery (251)
  • Toxicology (43)
  • Transplantation (120)
  • Urology (94)