|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Education and Public Engagement
|
|
We set out to educate the public about the rise of antibiotic resistance and the large applicability of home diagnostic devices. To this end, we participated in fairs, youth educational meet-ups and universities open-days. We brought printed paperfluidics to let everyone experiment with simple detection systems – color-based pH detection on paper was our toy model for detection of infectious diseases. In order to measure the awareness about synthetic biology and the level of comfort towards performing self-diagnosis, we conducted a survey for students and the general public. We also interviewed experts to gather educated opinion on the concerns surrounding synthetic biology and genetically modified organisms, as well as paper-based diagnosis devices and their distribution in areas with limited access to medical help. We have raised awareness on the issue of antibiotic resistance and familiarized hundreds of people to the possibility to utilize user-friendly paper-based diagnostics, which rely on synthetic biological circuits.
|
|
Survey Results
|
|
We conducted a survey on synthetic biology and diagnostics devices to find out how the public would react to our project. We targeted different groups: Munich students and general public without a biological background. A part of the survey was conducted in the online platform Survey Monkey and the other part was done at the Munich city center where we distributed the survey handouts. We hoped this survey would help us improve our project by understanding the public interest and doubts about diagnostic devices. We analyzed the survey data and interpreted the results.
|
|
Question 1: Do you know about synthetic biology?
|
|
53% of the students in the Munich area knew about synthetic biology but only 13.8% of the general public have heard about this field.
|
|
|
Question 2: Do you know about the iGEM competition?
|
|
From the surveyed students, 30% have heard of iGEM before, but only 5.2% of the general public knew about it. This is not surprising considering the previous results, that not so many people are acquainted with the synthetic biology field.
|
|
|
Question 3: Do you know about the CRISPR/Cas system?
|
|
Although the CRISPR/Cas system has been hyped by both the media and scientists as one of the most important technologies because of its genome editing applications, less than half of the students and 12% of the public knew about it.
|
|
|
Question 4: Do you trust in home diagnostic devices like home pregnancy tests?
|
|
Surprisingly, more than half of the students and public trust home-based diagnostic devices. This could mean that our device might be well accepted by the public.
|
|
|
Question 5: Would you use diagnostic devices at home to determine pathogenic diseases?
|
|
Only 25% of students compared to 86% of the public would use home diagnostic devices to know whether they have a pathogenic disease. The public´s answer corresponds to the result in the previous question on whether they trust this type of devices. However, although the majority of students trust home diagnostic devices like pregnancy tests, 75% of them would not use a similar device to detect a pathogenic disease.
|
|
|
Question 6: How often do you visit a doctor?
|
|
Most of the students and general public consulted go to the doctor every 6 months.
|
|
|
Question 7: Do you need to make an appointment when you go to see a doctor?
|
|
Most of the people need to first get an appointment in order to visit their doctors. Our device could be used as a first test for people to decide how urgently they need to see a doctor.
|
|
|
Question 8: How long do you have to wait for an appointment with a doctor?
|
|
The time that people need to wait for an appointment varies between days and weeks. This could make a difference in the treatment needed if an infection is diagnosed too late. Our device has the potential to be used as an early diagnostic so that the patient can get medical attention faster if needed.
|
|
|
Question 9: Would you use a diagnostic device at home instead of going to the doctor?
|
|
55% of the students and 86.2% of the general public would prefer to use a diagnostic device at home than going directly to the doctor. When we interviewed them, we stressed the importance of going to the doctor afterwards in order to get a professional opinion.
|
|
|
Question 10: Would you be comfortable to use a home diagnostic device for viral and bacterial infections?
|
|
70% of the students and 84.5% of the general public said that they would be comfortable when using a device to diagnose a viral or bacterial infection. This could mean that our device might be well received by the public.
|
|
Conclusion
Even though synthetic biology is considered a growing research field, not so many people are acquainted with it. Despite iGEM attracting hundreds of teams every year all over the world, the public seems to be not very well informed yet.
Regarding the use of home-based diagnostic devices, people seemed very eager to use them and would trust their results. Most of the people would prefer to use a test-at-home instead of going directly to the doctor, probably due to the long waiting time to get an appointment. However, we noticed some discrepancies when asking the students whether they would use this type of devices. When asked about their opinion about the use of such devices for pathogenic diseases, only 25% said they would. However, when we asked them if they would use a diagnostic device at home for discerning between a bacterial or viral infection, 70% answered favorably. This might be caused by the bias in the words used to describe the question.
From this survey we learned that our product will be positively accepted by the consumers, even for diagnosing viral or bacterial infections. Our device could be useful to get a first diagnosis before getting proper medical attention, in order to speed up the recovery and save time.
|
|
