ABSTRACT
Introduction COVID-19 has caused major disruptions to healthcare, with voluntary opportunities offered to medical students to provide clinical support. We used the conceptual framework of prosocial behavior during an emergency – behaviors whose primary focus is benefiting others – to examine volunteering during COVID-19.
Methods We conducted an in-depth, mixed-methods cross-sectional survey, from 2nd May to 15th June 2020, of medical students studying at UK medical schools. Data analysis was informed by Latane and Darley’s theory of prosocial behavior during an emergency and aimed to understand students’ decision-making processes.
Results A total of 1145 medical students from 36 medical schools completed the survey. While 947 (82.7%) of students were willing to volunteer, only 391 (34.3%) had volunteered. The majority (92.7%) of students understood that they may be asked to volunteer; however, we found that deciding one’s responsibility to volunteer was mitigated by a complex interaction between the interests of others and self-interest. Further, concerns revolving around professional role boundaries influenced students’ decisions over whether they had the required skills and knowledge to volunteer. Deciding to volunteer depended not only on possession of necessary skills, but also seniority and identification with the nature of volunteering roles offered.
Conclusions We propose two additional domains to Latane and Darley’s theory of prosocial behavior during an emergency that students consider before making their final decision to volunteer. These are ‘logistics’ – whether it is logistically feasible to volunteer – and ‘safety’ – whether it is safe to volunteer. This study highlights a number of modifiable barriers to prosocial behavior that medical students encounter and provides suggestions regarding how Latane and Darley’s theory of prosocial behavior can be operationalized within educational strategies to address these barriers. Optimizing the process of volunteering can aid healthcare provision and may facilitate a safer volunteering process for all.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Nil
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethical approval for the study was obtained from the University of Cambridge Psychology Research Ethics Committee (PRE.2020.040).
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
Footnotes
Alternative contact: Name: James Ashcroft, Email address: james.ashcroft{at}addenbrookes.nhs.uk, Full Institution address: Addenbrooke’s Hospital, Hills Rd, Cambridge, UK, Institution post code: CB2 0QQ
Sources of support: Nil
Conflicts of interests: None financial or otherwise
Authorship: MHVB, JA, JW, LA were responsible for conceptualization. All authors were responsible for writing the first draft. MHVB, JA, JW, LA were responsible for data collection. JW was responsible for quantitative data analysis, MHVB and LA were responsible for qualitative analysis. MHVB, JA, JW, NS, CB were responsible for interpretation of data. All authors were responsible for revisions. CB was responsible for supervision.
Data availability: The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
Study type: Cross sectional survey
Data Availability
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.