User Experiences of the NZ COVID Tracer App in New Zealand: Thematic Analysis of Interviews

Background: For mobile app–based COVID-19 contact tracing to be fully effective, a large majority of the population needs to be using the app on an ongoing basis. However, there is a paucity of studies of users, as opposed to potential adopters, of mobile contact tracing apps and of their experiences. New Zealand, a high-income country with western political culture, was successful in managing the COVID-19 pandemic, and its experience is valuable for informing policy responses in similar contexts. Objective: This study asks the following research questions: (1) How do users experience the app in their everyday contexts? and (2) What drives the use of the app? Methods: Residents of New Zealand’s Auckland region, which encompasses the country’s largest city, were approached via Facebook, and 34 NZ COVID Tracer app users were interviewed. Interview transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis. Results: Interviews ranged in duration from 15 to 50 minutes. Participants ranged in age from those in their late teens to those in their early sixties. Even though about half of the participants identified as White New Zealanders of European origin, different ethnicities were represented, including New Zealanders of South Pacific, Indian, Middle Eastern, South American, and Southeast Asian descent. Out of 34 participants, 2 (6%) identified as Māori (Indigenous New Zealanders). A broad range of careers were represented, from top-middle management to health support work and charity work. Likewise, educational backgrounds ranged broadly, from high school completion to master’s degrees. Out of 34 participants, 2 (6%) were unemployed, having recently lost their jobs because of the pandemic. The thematic analysis resulted in five major themes: perceived benefits, patterns of use, privacy, social influence, and need for collective action. Benefits of using the app to society in general were more salient to the participants than immediate health benefits to the individual. Use, however, depended on the alert level and tended to decline for many participants at low alert levels. Privacy considerations played a small role in shaping adoption and use, even though the participants were highly aware of privacy discourse around the app. Participants were aware of the need for high levels of adoption and use of the app to control the pandemic. Attempts to encourage others to use the app were common, although not always successful. Conclusions: Appeals to civic responsibility are likely to drive the use of a mobile contact tracing app under the conditions of high threat. Under the likely scenario of COVID-19 remaining endemic and requiring ongoing vigilance over the long term, other mechanisms promoting the use of mobile contact tracing apps may be needed, such as offering incentives. As privacy is not an important concern for many users, flexible privacy settings in mobile contact tracing apps allowing users to set their optimal levels of privacy may be appropriate. (JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2021;9(9):e26318) doi: 10.2196/26318


Introduction
Background Contact tracing is a nonpharmaceutical intervention commonly used for curbing the spread of COVID-19 [1,2]. Manual contact tracing, conducted by interviewing patients diagnosed with the disease to identify their close contacts, is rather slow, and digital contact tracing involving digitally recording information about individuals' movements has been suggested to be potentially considerably more effective based on simulation evidence [3]. Mobile apps that perform digital contact tracing have been implemented in many countries, such as Australia [4] and Singapore [5]. Based on cross-country comparison, Urbaczewski and Lee [6] asserted that mobile app-based contact tracing is effective in helping countries to keep COVID-19 under control.
For mobile app-based contact tracing to be fully effective, a large majority of the population needs to be using the app on an ongoing basis [3,7]. The importance of mobile contact tracing app adoption prompted several empirical studies. Trang et al [8] conducted an experiment in Germany where they suggested alternative designs and made different appeals about the benefits offered, asking the respondents to rate their intent to install the app. They found that citizens can be divided into three categories: critics, undecided, and advocates. Critics were more likely to accept an app based on an appeal that by using it they would protect society in general, and they were more likely to accept app designs with strong privacy features. Undecided citizens, similar to critics, responded to societal-benefit appeals, but valued convenience in app use more than they valued privacy. Neither critics nor undecided citizens cared about the app offering health benefits to them as individuals. Finally, advocates responded to both societal-benefit and self-benefit appeals and did not care about privacy or convenience.
In a similar experiment conducted in the United Kingdom, Wiertz et al [9] offered citizens four configurations of an app differing by self-benefits offered, privacy, and the entity overseeing the app. Citizens-treated as a single group-preferred an app offering self-benefits and that was overseen by an independent entity, rather than by the government. Wiertz et al [9] found no evidence suggesting that citizens valued the privacy features of an app. Jonker et al [10] conducted a discrete choice experiment in the Netherlands, allowing citizens to rate a range of possible features of a mobile contact tracing app. Citizens preferred an app that would store data locally and give them control over whether to share it with the authorities. Further, they preferred an app that would offer a small financial reward. Thus, the results regarding the effects of privacy features and of self-benefits were not consistent across studies.
Walrave et al [11] conducted a survey in Belgium to determine factors affecting citizen intention to adopt a mobile contact tracing app. The study used the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) framework [12]; performance expectancy (ie, benefits offered by the app, conceptualized by Walrave at al [11] as societal benefits), effort expectancy, social influence, and facilitating conditions (ie, having the knowledge and resources necessary to use the app) were considered as potential factors. Further, innovativeness, privacy concerns, and COVID-19-related stress were added to the basic UTAUT model. The most important factor was performance expectancy, followed by facilitating conditions and social influence. Innovativeness and privacy concerns had weaker effects on intention to adopt. The results by Walrave et al [11] are complemented by a survey by Altmann et al [13] that was conducted in France, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Regarding reasons to install a mobile contact tracing app, the respondents rated benefits to family and friends higher than benefits to the broader community. In addition, they rated concerns about government surveillance and security highly regarding the main reasons against installation, with concerns about government surveillance rated the highest. Further, greater trust in the government was associated with higher app installation intent.
In all the studies introduced above, the participants had no exposure to a real mobile contact tracing app and answered questions with a hypothetical app in mind.

Research Questions
The results of the studies published so far are not entirely consistent regarding factors driving the adoption of a mobile contact trading app. Further, studies of users, as opposed to potential adopters, of mobile contact tracing apps and their experiences are not available.
Better understanding of user experiences with the NZ (New Zealand) COVID Tracer app is of practical interest for countries using mobile contact tracing apps to protect their populations from COVID-19, particularly if COVID-19 becomes endemic [14], possibly necessitating the continued use of contact tracing over the long term. Further, understanding user experiences with a mobile contact tracing app is of broader theoretical interest for epidemiology. Therefore, this study asks the following research questions: 1. How do users experience the app in their everyday contexts? 2. What drives the use of the app?

Overall Approach and Study Setting
Qualitative design was used, as it is particularly suitable for an exploratory study of user experiences [15][16][17]. Data were collected via semistructured interviews with users of the NZ COVID Tracer app, New Zealand's official mobile contact tracing app overseen by the Ministry of Health [18].
The study was conducted in the Auckland region; Auckland is the biggest city in New Zealand. New Zealand's COVID-19 outbreak response, as assessed in October 2020, has been recognized as successful [19]. Thus, the New Zealand experience may be of interest. The Auckland region was chosen because it has experienced more COVID-19-related disruption than the rest of the country, as detailed in the following section.
Interviews were conducted 5 months after the app became available, allowing us to explore user experiences in the context of how the pandemic situation in the Auckland region and the

NZ COVID Tracer App and COVID-19 Pandemic in New Zealand
The NZ COVID Tracer app was released by New Zealand's Ministry of Health on May 20, 2020 [20], simultaneously for iOS and for Android platforms. The app was presented as a "digital diary," allowing the recording of places the users of the app visited by scanning QR (Quick Response) codes. Users could also register their contact details with the app to make it easier for COVID-19 contact tracers to reach them.
Privacy was emphasized in the app design and in the Ministry of Health's communications about the app: information about places visited by the user was stored locally on the phone and was not shared with contact tracing services automatically; in the initial release of the app, the user had to open the app and read out the information to contact tracers. Further, the information was automatically deleted after 31 days. Moreover, for security and privacy reasons, to use the app users had to log on using a strong (ie, sufficiently long and complex) password. The password had to be re-entered every 30 days, resulting in confusion for some of the users, who would not remember the password and, thus, were locked out of the app, as documented in comments on the Apple App Store [21] and on Google Play [22].
On June 15, 2020, the app was updated to allow users to be notified if they visited a venue around the same time as a known COVID-19 case [23]. This feature was implemented without sending users' location data to the Ministry of Health. Further, users could now send their location data to contact tracers if they chose to do so. If the initial version of the app solely supported the contact tracing process, thus offering benefits for the community or for the country as a whole, the updated app offered immediate benefits to the users, who, in case of exposure, could be diagnosed earlier and could receive early treatment, thus improving their prognosis [24]. Moreover, users receiving an alert could self-isolate, thus protecting their family, friends, and colleagues.
Benefits to the community, the user's family, and the user as an individual have been repeatedly highlighted in subsequent communications by the Ministry of Health: "Taking a few seconds to scan in with the app means we can quickly inform you when you may have been exposed to the virus, so you can take steps to protect yourself and your whānau [extended family]," "It also means if you test positive for the virus, you can instantly provide your digital diary to contact tracers to give them a massive head-start," and "The faster we can contact trace, the quicker we can get ahead of the virus and prevent spread in the community" [25].
Another major update of the app was on July 30, 2020, when the ability to add manual entries to record visits to locations with no QR codes, such as visits to friends and family, was added [26], allowing one "to maintain a complete -and private -record." Initially, organizations were encouraged but not required to display QR codes compatible with the Ministry of Health's NZ COVID Tracer app [20]. However, starting from August 19, 2020, displaying QR codes became compulsory for most business premises and for many transport services [27].
Even though location data were held locally on users' phones, usage data, including the number of app registrations, the number of active devices, the number of QR code scans, and the number of manual entries, were available to the Ministry of Health, and some aggregate data were routinely shared via media releases (eg, Ministry of Health [28,29]). Further, historical data were available for download, and some of them are presented in Figure 1, where they are combined with historical data on the number of active COVID-19 cases in New Zealand on the COVID-19 data portal from Stats NZ, New Zealand's official data agency [30]. A more detailed graph of the number of active COVID-19 cases in New Zealand, distinguishing import-related and locally acquired cases, can be viewed at the Ministry of Health website [31]. The history of COVID-19 alert levels in the Auckland region-Auckland is the biggest city in New Zealand; the population of the Auckland region centered on Auckland is 1.6 million, about one-third of the total population of New Zealand [32]-is also shown in Figure 1, based on a document released by the New Zealand government [33]; Alert Level 4 corresponds to a lockdown with substantial restrictions on movement, while Alert Level 1 suggests heightened vigilance, but very few restrictions.
As seen in Figure 1, the NZ COVID Tracer app was introduced at the end of the first lockdown, which covered the whole of New Zealand, including Auckland [33], and received very little acceptance over June and July, while the country remained at Alert Level 1. Nonetheless, on August 12, 2020, a COVID-19 case with unknown source was discovered in Auckland, resulting in the alert level being raised to Alert Level 3 in the Auckland region and to Alert Level 2 in the rest of the country. This prompted a steep increase in the use of the NZ COVID Tracer app, with the daily number of QR scans growing by two levels of magnitude. However, the level of use decreased considerably once the country returned to Alert Level 1, although it remained considerably higher than before the second lockdown. Relatively high levels of active cases in October and November were almost exclusively imported cases, reflecting the growth of the pandemic overseas [34], and were not associated with higher use of the app.
New Zealand's COVID-19 outbreak response, as assessed in October 2020, has been recognized as successful [19]. However, in spite of the growth in adoption over the second lockdown in Auckland, the potential of the NZ COVID Tracer app in contributing to this response was not fully realized. As of November 13, 2020, even though 2.3 million users-almost half of the population of the country-were registered with the app, fewer than 1 in 6 of them were using it daily [25]. In an incident in Auckland involving a COVID-19 case visiting business premises on November 7, 2020, the number of potential contacts who could be traced via the app was very low, prompting the Ministry of Health to issue an appeal to citizens to use the app more [35]. In November 2020, improving user engagement with the NZ COVID Tracer app remained a problem for New Zealand.

Semistructured Interviews
The semistructured interview guide (Multimedia Appendix 1) was based on the UTAUT framework [11,12] and focused on effort expectancy (ie, effort associated with using the app), social influence (ie, the extent to which important others are perceived as encouraging the use of the app), facilitating conditions (ie, help available), and habit. Following Walrave et al [11], privacy concerns also received focus. Further, the interview guide emphasized perceived severity of COVID-19 (ie, the perceived consequences of being infected) and perceived susceptibility to COVID-19 (ie, the perceived likelihood of getting infected), concepts borrowed from the protection motivation theory (PMT) [36,37]. The benefits of using a mobile contact tracer app were explored at several levels, following Altmann et al [13], distinguishing benefits to the individual, the family, and society in general. Further, the self-reported patterns of use and the associated experiences were explored in detail, focusing both on current use and on how the approach to using the app by the respondent has changed over time. Moreover, the respondents were asked to project how they are anticipating using the app in the future. Respondents were allowed to deviate from the framework suggested by the interview guide, for as long as the interview remained overall relevant to the research questions of the study.
Participants were recruited using an advertising campaign on Facebook targeting Auckland region residents aged 18 to 64 years (55.19% of the New Zealand population are Facebook users [38]). The campaign invited users of the NZ COVID Tracer app to contribute to the fight against COVID-19 by granting an interview. Further, the participants were entered into a draw to win a token prize. All individuals meeting the criteria who expressed interest in being interviewed were interviewed until the desired sample size was reached; thus, a nonprobability consecutive sampling strategy was used. Following Braun and Clarke [39], the sample size was based on the sample sizes found to be sufficient to answer research questions in similar studies, such as Wessels et al [15] and Byambasuren et al [40], and on pragmatic considerations, such as the ability of the researchers to analyze the resulting volume of data within a reasonable time. The interviews were conducted by the first author over Zoom in late October and early November 2020. The interviews were transcribed in full for analysis.

Analysis
Thematic analysis of interview transcripts was conducted following Braun and Clarke [39]. Both deductive and inductive approaches were used, with deductive coding drawing from the UTAUT and the PMT. Following Braun and Clarke, concepts drawn from the UTAUT and the PMT, as introduced in the previous section, were used as a sensitizing device that was used to attract analysts' attention to potentially relevant aspects in the data; the aim was to understand user experiences and drivers of app use, rather than to test the UTAUT or the PMT. NVivo 12 (QSR International) was used for coding.
Both coauthors analyzed the data. Both researchers have higher degrees in information technology-related disciplines, with the first coauthor having a stronger technical background and the second coauthor having a background in medicine. Because of the difference in backgrounds, the researchers provided complementary perspectives. The researchers analyzed the data independently, periodically integrating the findings, and resolved differences via discussion.

Ethics
Following the university's ethics procedures, a low-risk notification was filed. Participants were informed in writing of their rights, such as the right to withdraw from the study at any point and the right to ask questions about the study. After receiving this information, the participants gave consent in writing.

Participants
Interviews were conducted with 34 residents of the Auckland region, with interview durations ranging from 15 to 50 minutes (mean 23, SD 8.9; median 21.4). Participants (Table 1) ranged in age from those in their late teens to those in their early sixties. Even though about half of the participants identified as White New Zealanders of European origin, different ethnicities were represented, including New Zealanders of South Pacific, Indian, Middle Eastern, South American, and Southeast Asian descent. Out of 34 participants, 2 (6%) identified as Māori (Indigenous New Zealanders) and 1 (3%) was a temporary visitor from Europe stranded in New Zealand because of the COVID-19 pandemic (Participant #4). A broad range of careers was represented, from top-middle management to health support work and charity work. Out of 34 participants, 1 (3%) was a female homemaker and 1 (3%) was retired. Likewise, educational backgrounds ranged broadly, from high school completion to master's degrees. Out of 34 participants, 2 (6%) were unemployed (Participants #1 and #2), having recently lost their jobs because of the pandemic.

Themes
The thematic analysis resulted in five major themes: perceived benefits, patterns of use, privacy, social influence, and need for collective action. These themes are depicted along with the underlying subthemes and codes in Table 2. The content of the themes is presented in detail in the following sections. Overall, while benefits for contact tracing in the context of protecting society in general arose very naturally in the interviews, benefits to the individual using the app were often mentioned only after specific prompting by the interviewer, and different participants had different views on what they are.
Finally, some of the participants perceived the ability of the government to have access to location data and to conduct research using these data as a benefit, although it was not really a benefit because of the privacy features of the app: Manual entries were used when a QR code was not available or could not be scanned easily (eg, it was in an inconvenient location or was laminated, so that reflected light inhibited scanning):

I just look for the QR codes and just record visits. Every now and then, it hasn't worked and I've recorded manual visit, but that doesn't seem to be happening so much. [Participant #14]
Another common use of manual entries was to record visits to locations after the fact, when forgetting to scan the QR code: Patterns of use were impacted by updates rolled out by the app developers. For many of the participants, the app was entirely unusable at the beginning (eg, did not scan QR codes well enough or did not scan them at all). One of the participants reported installing and uninstalling the app multiple times, until a version that worked on her phone had been released: Participants could be divided according to how their use of the app related to alert levels. While some of them reported continuing to use the app irrespective of the level of the alert-this behavior tended to be associated with the perception of being highly vulnerable to the virus-others reported less consistent use before and after the second lockdown; this was consistent with the pattern suggested in Figure 1:

Privacy
Most of the participants did not worry about the app reducing their privacy. Privacy, however, was very prominent in the interviews, with the participants often discussing it with no prompt from the interviewer. Reasons mentioned for not worrying about privacy included the following: (1) the participant has nothing to hide; (2) the participants already perceive themselves as having no privacy as they are tracked via social media, by mobile phone service providers, via transaction records, or by other means; and (3)  At the same time, some of the participants expressed negative attitudes toward mainstream and social media discourses overemphasizing privacy issues around the app. One of the participants, when asked about others discouraging her from using the app, pointed at one of the major New Zealand newspapers:

Newspapers, like [name of a major New Zealand newspaper], constantly have articles about how it's taking away our privacy and stuff like that. [Participant #2]
Of the two participants who expressed concerns about privacy, one reported weighing privacy concerns against the benefits of faster contact tracing and deciding that benefits overweigh the risks. The other participant reiterated privacy concerns throughout the interview, but the concerns were not focused on the app and, rather, were about the overall environment, including social media and mobile phone service providers. At the same time, when asked how the app could be improved, the participant suggested an improvement that would reduce, rather than increase, privacy: Many participants suggested improvements that would reduce privacy (eg, recording visits automatically using wireless technology, using GPS to track app user location, or using wireless technology to automatically detect and record the proximity of others). None of the participants suggested changes to the app that would increase privacy.

Social Influence and the Need for Collective Action
Overwhelmingly, the participants expressed high levels of trust in the New Zealand government. Often, the fact that information comes from the government was a criterion of its trustworthiness. Using the app was seen as their civic duty and a way to be a good citizen of New Zealand. Moreover, some of the participants framed patterns of behavior in terms of "good" and "bad." A phrase introduced by the Prime Minister and repeatedly used in communications about the pandemic by her and other officials was commonly mentioned: "the team of the five million" [41,42]: However, trust in the government was not a prerequisite for using the app. One of the participants, a manager in an industry that was highly critical in maintaining the functioning of the city during lockdowns, expressed very low levels of trust in the government, even suggesting that the government purposefully distorted some of the information related to the pandemic; at the same time, he reported not only using the app but also ensuring that it was installed on mobile devices used by employees, as well as establishing procedures to ensure that visitors to company premises used the app: The existence of "conspiracy theorists" raising, from the perspective of the participants, unreasonable or untrue privacy concerns, was occasionally acknowledged. Although one of the participants described himself as a "conspiracy theorist," he still used the app, judging that the benefits were greater than the risks, as introduced in the Privacy section: ...some think that the COVID- 19  Many of the participants were concerned about the behavior of others in using the app and in reducing the risk of COVID-19 spread in other ways. The realization that protecting the country from the pandemic depended on collective action was rather strong. Often, rather than expecting the authorities to improve technological capabilities or ease of use of the app, the participants highlighted the need to encourage its broader use:

Principal Findings
The main contribution of this study of adoption and use of a mobile contact tracing app is that it is based on data reflecting real user experiences, rather than on perceptions of individuals who are yet to use such an app. Prior studies predicting mobile contact tracing app adoption and use relied on data obtained from nonusers.
The results of this study are consistent with the finding by Trang et al [8] that perceptions of benefits for society as a whole are likely to drive the use of a mobile contact tracing app. However, the results also suggest that such benefits are mainly relevant when the level of threat to society is high. For many individuals, but not all, the logic of taking individual action to protect the society on which the individuals depend is powerful enough to drive sustained use only when the threat to the society is salient enough.
The results of our study are consistent with Altmann et al [13] in suggesting that trust in the government helps to promote mobile tracing app use. Nonetheless, the finding by Altmann et al [13] that concerns about government surveillance are very important were not confirmed by our study. This may be, in part, because our study covered only the users of the app, who were likely to fall into the "advocates" category following Trang et al [8]. Assuming the participants of this study were "advocates," the finding that privacy did not matter for them is consistent with the results by Trang et al [8]. The results of our study are consistent with Wiertz et al [9], who also found little evidence that privacy is highly relevant, as well as with the body of literature on the privacy paradox [43], which suggests that in actual use, users are prepared to trade their privacy even for rather small benefits.
The NZ COVID Tracer app was designed in such a way that its use, or nonuse, was highly visible. Thus, social influence, found to have an effect by Walrave et al [11], could be highly influential. Nonetheless, for most of the participants, social influence by peers appeared to play a secondary role in driving their app use. Indeed, some of them continued to use the app while surrounded by nonusers. For them, social influence was coming from the government, not from the peers. At the same time, the results indicate that organizations may be effective in promoting the use of the mobile tracing app by their employees: employees who are not users are likely to comply to become users, rather than resist.
Our study found no indications that an app overseen by an independent entity, rather than by the government, would be better accepted or used more, and in this respect, our results did not confirm the results by Wiertz et al [9]. Indeed, the discourse by the app users around good citizenship and civic duty as reasons for using the app suggested that oversight by the government was a good choice in the New Zealand context. Nonetheless, this conclusion has to be confirmed by a study of nonusers of the app.
The study by Walrave et al [11] did not find effort expectancy to be an important factor. Our results were consistent with this finding. Determined users of the app were prepared to persist in the face of technical difficulties. This is not to suggest that effort expectancy is irrelevant; however, there was little evidence to suggest that, after the initial bugs were fixed, making the app even more effortless to use would result in significantly higher adoption and use.
The implications for practice are that appeals to civic responsibility are likely to drive the use of a mobile tracing app under the conditions of high threat, as citizens "rally around the flag." Under the likely scenario of COVID-19 remaining endemic and requiring ongoing vigilance over the long term, other mechanisms promoting the use of mobile tracing apps may be needed, such as "nudging" [44] (eg, offering incentives). Further, the results suggest that privacy is not an important concern for many users. Having access to more detailed information faster would benefit contact tracing, enabling faster isolation of probable cases and, thus, better control of the pandemic. Therefore, compared with a mobile tracing app with uniformly restrictive privacy features, an app with flexible privacy settings allowing users to set their optimal levels of privacy-thus allowing users who are less concerned about privacy to opt in to provide more detailed information faster-may be more appropriate.
The value of comparing responses between countries in informing decision making in the COVID-19 pandemic has been highlighted by Pearce et al [45], who characterized health policy responses in different jurisdictions as "numerous natural experiments in progress" (page 1059 in Pearce et al [45]). The case of New Zealand is particularly valuable in this respect because it presents an example of a successful response [46,47] achieved in a country with western political culture [48]. As such, the New Zealand experience in managing the pandemic has received a lot of attention in international literature [49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56].
Our study contributes to this body of literature by focusing on the experiences of the users of the NZ COVID Tracer app. However, the results of this study, as well as of other studies of the New Zealand experience in managing the COVID-19 pandemic, cannot be mechanically applied to other contexts. Rather, as for most qualitative studies, the process of case-to-case transfer [57] should apply: the readers and the consumers of the research should compare their context of interest to the New Zealand context and judge the extent to which the findings apply to their situation (page 1453 in Polit and Beck [57]). A broad description of the New Zealand context as it applies to the management of the COVID-19 pandemic is given by Jefferies et al [54], who assert that the New Zealand response to COVID-19 "has international relevance, particularly for other island nations, high-income and western settings" (page e613 in Jefferies et al [54]). Further, aspects of the context immediately relevant to the research questions of our study, such as the app design and the way it was introduced, relying on persuasion rather than on mandates, are described in the initial sections of this paper.

Conclusions
Appeals to civic responsibility are likely to drive the use of a mobile contact tracing app under the conditions of high threat. Under the likely scenario of COVID-19 remaining endemic and requiring ongoing vigilance over the long term, other mechanisms promoting the use of mobile contact tracing apps may be needed, such as offering incentives. As privacy is not an important concern for many users, flexible privacy settings in mobile contact tracing apps allowing users to set their optimal levels of privacy may be appropriate.

Conflicts of Interest
None declared.