A reappraisal of public engagement in Oxford during the pandemic: three case studies

Abstract

Background The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in the majority of public engagement with research work moving online. This shift to online engagement is likely to affect inclusivity and diversity in such events and this requires further consideration as a result of the pandemic. Through comparing case-studies both pre-dating and during the pandemic, we are able to discern areas for ongoing improvement and learning in the public engagement sphere. Main body The public engagement work of the Wellcome Centre for Ethics and Humanities has sought to include a broad discussion on its research from a range of demographics, attempting to be inclusive in the engagement work of the Centre. However such efforts have not always been successful and we reflect here on two different pre-pandemic ‘in-person’ case studies assessing public views on vaccination and medical data sharing. In contrast we compare these pre-pandemic activities to a fully online case study coordinated and completed during the pandemic. These three case studies are compared and assessed for evidence of their efficacy in a post-pandemic world. Conclusion Research and public awareness benefit when multiple views are included in engagement events. Broader demographics enrich our ways of understanding societal responses to healthcare issues such as vaccination, data sharing and social responsibility. The move to online engagement as a result of the pandemic may open opportunities to widening engagement geographically, but it could also pose a threat to inclusivity with certain public groups on a more local level. Enabling access to online engagement is key, but considerations must be made regarding the new barriers created by a solely online world and the many groups of people inadvertently excluded from this work.

Public engagement with genomics

“…Social media and virtual platforms . As social media increases in popularity, more studies are using online platforms and virtual means to engage the online public in conversations about genomics 48 , 70 , 71 . Some studies we identified used social media and other virtual platforms simply to invite debate and raise awareness of genomics 48 , 70 , 71 , while others collected data through social media or asked participants to interact with videos or films through a virtual platform 70 , 72 .…”

“…As social media increases in popularity, more studies are using online platforms and virtual means to engage the online public in conversations about genomics 48 , 70 , 71 . Some studies we identified used social media and other virtual platforms simply to invite debate and raise awareness of genomics 48 , 70 , 71 , while others collected data through social media or asked participants to interact with videos or films through a virtual platform 70 , 72 . Often, this form of engagement has been used to complement more traditional social sciences research (e.g., surveys, interviews), or traditional forms of engagement (e.g., a panel discussion involving a group of experts, and public audiences invited to attend and ask questions) 70 , 72 .…”

“…Compared to other “novel” methods of engagement (see below), social media or online-based engagement methods have the widest reach in terms of audiences engaged 48 , 70 , 71 . Furthermore, many social media platforms have inbuilt methods of tracking users, allowing the interactions to be measured 48 .…”

“Spine to the future”—A narrative review of anatomy engagement

“…The move to online engagement, necessitated by circumstances, is a learning experience for all involved. However, it is important to note that it is not always inclusive of all the audiences that may want to attend 40 . The size and scale of many of the anatomical structures and the location relative to neighboring structures are often noted by participants attending events.…”

Public governance of medical artificial intelligence research in the UK: an integrated multi-scale model

“…Over the past couple of years, responses to the covid-19 pandemic has affected possibilities for public involvement in a number of ways, from reducing the likelihood of researchers seeking public involvement to transforming the means through which deliberation occur [55][56][57]. Some of these changes-for instance, the transition to digital methods of involvement-can be enabling for some, but constraining for others, depending upon facility with and access to digital communications.…”