Public acceptability of COVID-19 control measures in Singapore, Hong Kong, and Malaysia: A cross-sectional survey

•Public support for control measures differed in Singapore, Hong Kong, and Malaysia•There is strong public support for vaccination requirements for travelers in Asia•Our study highlights the impact of sociopolitical influences on public perception•Public attitudes toward such control measures should...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:International journal of infectious diseases 2022-07, Vol.120, p.51-58
Hauptverfasser: Voo, Teck Chuan, Ballantyne, Angela, Ng, Chirk Jenn, Cowling, Benjamin J., Xiao, Jingyi, Phang, Kean Chang, Kaur, Sharon, Jenarun, Grazele, Kumar, Vishakha, Lim, Jane Mingjie, Tun, Zaw Myo, Wong, Nigel Chong Boon, Tam, Clarence C.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:•Public support for control measures differed in Singapore, Hong Kong, and Malaysia•There is strong public support for vaccination requirements for travelers in Asia•Our study highlights the impact of sociopolitical influences on public perception•Public attitudes toward such control measures should be continually monitored Several countries have implemented control measures to limit SARS-CoV-2 spread, including digital contact tracing, digital monitoring of quarantined individuals, and testing of travelers. These raise ethical issues around privacy, personal freedoms, and equity. However, little is known regarding public acceptability of these measures. In December 2020, we conducted a survey among 3635 respondents in Singapore, Hong Kong, and Malaysia to understand public perceptions on the acceptability of COVID-19 control measures. Hong Kong respondents were much less supportive of digital contact tracing and monitoring devices than those in Malaysia and Singapore. Around three-quarters of Hong Kong respondents perceived digital contact tracing as an unreasonable restriction of individual freedom;
ISSN:1201-9712
1878-3511
DOI:10.1016/j.ijid.2022.04.021