PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Drury, John AU - Mao, Guanlan AU - John, Ann AU - Kamal, Atiya AU - Rubin, G James AU - Stott, Clifford AU - Vandrevala, Tushna AU - Marteau, Theresa M TI - Behavioural responses to Covid-19 health certification: A rapid review AID - 10.1101/2021.04.07.21255072 DP - 2021 Jan 01 TA - medRxiv PG - 2021.04.07.21255072 4099 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/04/09/2021.04.07.21255072.short 4100 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/04/09/2021.04.07.21255072.full AB - Background Covid-status certification – certificates for those who test negative for the SARS-CoV-2 virus, test positive for antibodies, or who have been vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 – has been proposed to enable safer access to a range of activities. Realising these benefits will depend in part upon the behavioural and social impacts of certification. The aim of this rapid review was to describe public attitudes towards certification, and its possible impact on uptake of testing and vaccination, protective behaviours, and crime.Method A search was undertaken in peer-reviewed databases, pre-print databases, and the grey literature, from 2000 to December 2020. Studies were included if they measured attitudes towards or behavioural consequences of health certificates based on one of three indices of Covid-19 status: test-negative result for current infectiousness, test-positive for antibodies conferring natural immunity, or vaccination(s) conferring immunity.Results Thirty-three papers met the inclusion criteria, only three of which were rated as low risk of bias. Public attitudes were generally favourable towards the use of immunity certificates for international travel, but unfavourable towards their use for access to work and other activities. A significant minority was strongly opposed to the use of certificates of immunity for any purpose. The limited evidence suggested that intention to get vaccinated varied with the activity enabled by certification or vaccination (e.g., international travel). Where vaccination is seen as compulsory this could lead to unwillingness to accept a subsequent vaccination. There was some evidence that restricting access to settings and activities to those with antibody test certificates may lead to deliberate exposure to infection in a minority. Behaviours that reduce transmission may decrease upon health certificates based on any of the three indices of Covid-19 status, including physical distancing and handwashing.Conclusions The limited evidence suggests that health certification in relation to COVID-19 – outside of the context of international travel – has the potential for harm as well as benefit. Realising the benefits while minimising the harms will require real-time evaluations allowing modifications to maximise the potential contribution of certification to enable safer access to a range of activities.Competing Interest StatementCompeting interests: All authors participate in the UK's Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies and/or its subgroups but are writing in a personal capacity. Clinical TrialIt's a systematic review of published researchFunding StatementThe work of JD and CS on this paper was supported by a grant from the ESRC (reference number ES/V005383/1). GJR is funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit (NIHR HPRU) in Emergency Preparedness and Response a partnership between Public Health England Kings College London and the University of East Anglia. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the ESRC NIHR Public Health England or the Department of Health and Social Care. Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:N/A - it's a review of existing researchAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI 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.YesThere is no data as this is a rapid review paper. However, a complete list of sources with links can be found here at the OSF site below. https://osf.io/357kt/?view_only=475cd0776a274e6bbc74f95e1eecd0e0