scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Posted Content•DOI•

A randomized controlled trial of a video intervention shows evidence of increasing COVID-19 vaccination intention

Leah S. Witus1, Larson E1•
Macalester College1
29 Mar 2021-medRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press)-
TL;DR: In this article, a randomized controlled trial was conducted to investigate whether vaccination intention changes after viewing an animated YouTube video explaining how COVID-19 mRNA vaccines work, and they found that participants who watched the version of the video with a male narrator expressed statistically significant increased vaccination intention compared to the control group.
Abstract: Increasing acceptance of COVID–19 vaccines is imperative for public health, as unvaccinated individuals may impede the ability to reach herd immunity. Previous research on educational interventions to overcome vaccine hesitancy have shown mixed effects in increasing vaccination intention, although much of this work has focused on parental attitudes toward childhood vaccination. In this study, we conducted a randomized controlled trial to investigate whether vaccination intention changes after viewing an animated YouTube video explaining how COVID–19 mRNA vaccines work. We exposed participants to one of four interventions — watching the video with a male narrator, watching the same video with a female narrator, reading the text of the transcript of the video, or receiving no information (control group). We found that participants who watched the version of the video with a male narrator expressed statistically significant increased vaccination intention compared to the control group. The video with a female narrator had more variation in results. As a whole, there was a non–significant increased vaccination intention when analyzing all participants who saw the video with a female narrator; however, for politically conservative participants there was decreased vaccination intention for this intervention, particularly at a threshold between being currently undecided and expressing probable interest. These results are encouraging for the ability of interventions as simple as YouTube videos to increase vaccination propensity, although the inconsistent response to the video with a female narrator demonstrates the potential for bias to affect how certain groups respond to different messengers.

Summary (1 min read)

Jump to: [Introduction] – [Results and discussion:] and [Conclusion:]

Introduction

  • Even before COVID-19 became a pandemic in 2020, vaccine hesitancy was considered a top global health threat by the World Health Organization (1).
  • The video explains how the mRNA vaccine platforms work, highlights some of the positive features of the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines such as high efficacy and rarity of serious side effects, and emphasizes the altruism of vaccination.
  • 19), the overall tone of the video is an educational approach to influencing vaccination attitudes because in the case of the COVID-19 vaccines, the lack of knowledge about the new vaccine platform contribute to hesitancy.
  • Therefore, two versions were used in the study, identical but for the voice of the narrator: the Female-Narr-Video version had a female voice reading the transcript and the Male-Narr-Video version had a male voice.
  • Turk is well-validated and considered a reliable source for survey data (27-29).

Results and discussion:

  • Since vaccination attitudes exist on a continuum with anti-vaccine refusal on one end, active demand on the other, and uncertainty and hesitation in the middle (30,31), the authors considered vaccine intention as a continuum rather than a simple hesitant/intent binary.
  • The authors included a series of control variables (respondents’ race/ethnicity, gender, political ideology, age, and education) in their models that may associate with vaccine intention.
  • Figure 1 illustrates the substantive meaning of these coefficients by displaying predicted probabilities for a respondent who is white, male, politically moderate, under 55, and with at least a B.A. degree in each of the four experimental conditions (45).
  • Again, although not statistically significant, the negative coefficient for expressing a response with higher intention to vaccinate than “undecided” among those exposed to the Female-Narr-Video is striking (coefficient = –0.144, p = 0.429).
  • There is no evidence of conditioning of conservatives’ rating based on which version of the video they saw— the nonsignificant coefficient for the interaction term between conservative and the Female-NarrVideo condition has a positive sign.

Conclusion:

  • Widespread uptake of the COVID-19 vaccines worldwide is crucial for ending the COVID-19 pandemic.
  • Previous work on vaccine hesitancy interventions have recommended that health organizations use social media channels such as YouTube to spread pro-vaccination messages, but caution that vaccine communications should first be tested (7, 19-21).
  • The video studied herein only addresses the mRNA vaccines and does not explain many of the other vaccine questions and concerns people have.

Did you find this useful? Give us your feedback

Figures (3)

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

1
Main Manuscript for
A randomized controlled trial of a video intervention shows evidence
of increasing COVID-19 vaccination intention
Leah S. Witus
a
* and Erik Larson
b
*
a
Department of Chemistry, Macalester College, Saint Paul, MN, 55105. ORCID 0000-0002-2908-
934X
b
Department of Sociology, Macalester College, Saint Paul, MN, 55105. ORCID 0000-0002-6565-
8087
* Co-corresponding authors Leah S. Witus and Erik Larson, 1600 Grand Ave, Saint Paul, MN
55105
Email: lwitus@macalester.edu and larsone@macalester.edu
Author Contributions: LSW made the video, LSW and EL designed the survey, EL analyzed the
data, LSW and EL interpreted the data, LSW and EL wrote the manuscript.
Competing Interest Statement: There are no competing interests to disclose. (LSW made the
YouTube video as a part of a series of instructional videos made for educational purposes, and
has not, and does not plan to, generate revenue from the videos in this study).
Classification: Social sciences and Medical sciences
Keywords: Vaccine hesitancy. Science education. COVID-19 vaccines. Gender bias. Gender
and communication.
This file includes:
Main Text
Figures 1 to 2
Table 1
. CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International licenseIt is made available under a
is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. (which was not certified by peer review)
The copyright holder for this preprint this version posted March 29, 2021. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.03.26.21254433doi: medRxiv preprint
NOTE: This preprint reports new research that has not been certified by peer review and should not be used to guide clinical practice.
2
Abstract
Increasing acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines is imperative for public health, as unvaccinated
individuals may impede the ability to reach herd immunity. Previous research on educational
interventions to overcome vaccine hesitancy have shown mixed effects in increasing vaccination
intention, although much of this work has focused on parental attitudes toward childhood
vaccination. In this study, we conducted a randomized controlled trial to investigate whether
vaccination intention changes after viewing an animated YouTube video explaining how COVID-
19 mRNA vaccines work. We exposed participants to one of four interventions – watching the video
with a male narrator, watching the same video with a female narrator, reading the text of the
transcript of the video, or receiving no information (control group). We found that participants who
watched the version of the video with a male narrator expressed statistically significant increased
vaccination intention compared to the control group. The video with a female narrator had more
variation in results. As a whole, there was a non-significant increased vaccination intention when
analyzing all participants who saw the video with a female narrator; however, for politically
conservative participants there was decreased vaccination intention for this intervention,
particularly at a threshold between being currently undecided and expressing probable interest.
These results are encouraging for the ability of interventions as simple as YouTube videos to
increase vaccination propensity, although the inconsistent response to the video with a female
narrator demonstrates the potential for bias to affect how certain groups respond to different
messengers.
Significance Statement
Widespread vaccination is important for ending the COVID-19 pandemic. This study investigates
whether communicating the science behind new COVID-19 vaccines can increase people’s
willingness to get vaccinated. We examined the effectiveness of an eight-minute animated video
explaining how COVID-19 mRNA vaccines work, varying between a male narrator, a female
narrator, and a control group. Participants who saw the video with a male narrator expressed a
greater intent to get vaccinated than the control group. Participants who saw the video with a female
narrator had more varied responses, including a decreased intent to get vaccinated among political
conservatives. These findings indicate that science education may help increase vaccine uptake,
but that beliefs about gender may influence how people receive such information.
Main Text
Introduction
Even before COVID-19 became a pandemic in 2020, vaccine hesitancy was considered a top
global health threat by the World Health Organization (1). At the time this study was performed, in
February 2021, Emergency Use Authorization had been issued by the United States Food and
Drug Administration for two mRNA vaccines (Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna) for the prevention of
COVID-19, representing a tremendous public health success in their high efficacy and in the speed
of their development. While vaccine production and access have been rapidly increasing in the
United States and worldwide throughout the spring of 2021, overcoming vaccine hesitancy to
achieve high rates of vaccine uptake may be important for achieving herd immunity (2, 3). Although
studies have found that COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy has declined during the vaccine roll out (4),
rates of vaccine hesitancy still remain concerningly high, particularly when unvaccinated individuals
may pose a risk to members of society who are unable to be vaccinated (5). Therefore, research
. CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International licenseIt is made available under a
is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. (which was not certified by peer review)
The copyright holder for this preprint this version posted March 29, 2021. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.03.26.21254433doi: medRxiv preprint
3
to collect empirical evidence on the effect of interventions to increase vaccination intention is
needed.
This study examines an eight-minute, animated, educational YouTube video on the COVID-19
mRNA vaccines that we made called “COVID mRNA vaccines explained.” The video explains how
the mRNA vaccine platforms work, highlights some of the positive features of the COVID-19 mRNA
vaccines such as high efficacy and rarity of serious side effects, and emphasizes the altruism of
vaccination. While the lack of editorial oversight of health information on YouTube and other social
media platforms has contributed to the spread of vaccine misinformation and disinformation (6,7,8),
YouTube videos could constitute an attractive tool for public health campaigns as they are easily
disseminated through existing websites and social media platforms (9). Given the novelty of the
COVID-19 vaccine platforms, and the urge to help end the pandemic through promoting
vaccination, there are many health professionals, professors, and others who have been making
and posting vaccine explainer videos for YouTube and other social media platforms such as Tiktok.
However, there is little evidence about whether creating and sharing such videos is worthwhile: do
these efforts actually affect vaccination propensity? Previous research on web-based educational
interventions to increase vaccine acceptance, focused largely on parental attitudes toward
childhood vaccinations, has found mixed results (10-12) – some studies found evidence of
increased intention to vaccinate (13,14), some found no effect or effects that were not statistically
significant (15,16), and some even reported a backfire effect wherein the intervention decreased
vaccination intention (17,18). The prior literature highlights the need to continue such studies to
identify effective interventions for overcoming vaccine hesitancy (11,19-21).
Herein we present the results of a randomized controlled trial conducted with 1,184 Mechanical
Turk participants to investigate the effect on vaccination intention of an animated YouTube video
explaining how the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines work. We investigated whether the exact same
information presented in different formats would alter the efficacy of the communication by exposing
treatment groups to either: a) watching the video with a male narrator (Male-Narr-Video
https://youtu.be/Fv5bs4SPiYE), b) watching the same video with a female narrator (Female-Narr-
Video https://youtu.be/j3hTeDyvgPs), c) reading a blog post containing the text of the transcript of
the video, or d) receiving no information to serve as a control group. The visuals and scripts for
both versions of the videos were identical; only the voice of the narrator differed. The results
showed statistically significant higher vaccination intention in the group that watched the Male-Narr-
Video compared to the control group, a robust association for a variety of alternative specifications.
However, despite participants rating the quality of instruction of both the Male-Narr-Video and
Female-Narr-Video equally highly, we found less consistent associations on intention to vaccinate
for participants exposed to the Female-Narr-Video intervention. As a whole, the Female-Narr-Video
produced a non-significant increase in vaccination intention compared to the control group.
However, the impact on vaccination intention of the Female-Narr-Video varied by political identity
of the participants. Political conservatives who were exposed to the Female-Narr-Video were less
likely to express probable or definite interest in getting vaccinated than both other respondents
exposed to the Female-Narr-Video and conservatives exposed to no information in the control
group. Adjusting for this conditional association showed that for respondents who did not identify
as politically conservative, both videos associated with increased vaccine intention at much closer
rates, no matter the narrator. No such conditioning among political conservatives was observed for
participants exposed to the Male-Narr-Video. Although further research is warranted to investigate
the variation in efficacy based on the gender of the narrator, overall, this evidence supports the
idea that educational YouTube videos, such as the Male-Narr-Video, may serve as an easy to
share, simple way to increase vaccination intention.
Video development. The YouTube video was made by LSW in December 2020, shortly after the
issuance of Emergency Use Authorizations by the United States Food and Drug Association for
the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines for COVID-19, which are both mRNA vaccines. The
. CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International licenseIt is made available under a
is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. (which was not certified by peer review)
The copyright holder for this preprint this version posted March 29, 2021. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.03.26.21254433doi: medRxiv preprint
4
programs Biorender and Vyond were used to create the video, which uses animations and cartoon
characters to illustrate educational points about how the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines work. The
video begins with a review of the central dogma of biology, then explains how weakened virus
vaccines work before explaining what an mRNA vaccine means. The video then emphasizes that
the Pfizer-BioNTech (referred to as Pfizer in the video) and Moderna vaccines have been tested
for safety and efficacy, and ends with an explanation of how getting vaccinated can protect others
in society. Previous research on vaccine hesitancy interventions has identified common features
for successful communication. This video incorporates many of these features, including: i) The
video emphasizes the messages that approved vaccines are safe and go through evaluations (9),
and that immunization also protects others, which has been found to activate positive emotions (2).
ii) The video does not focus on messages that have been reported to impede efforts to diminish
vaccine hesitancy such as myth-busting, fear-based, or numerically focused messages (10). iii)
The video creates clear bottom-line (gist) messages through explanations of concepts in simple
language rather than scientific jargon, the use of animated illustrations to visually reinforce the
concepts explained verbally, and the use of text on the screen to underscore take-home messages.
The Fuzzy-Trace theory of medical decision making has found that gist messages contribute to
decision-making in a meaningful way relative to statistics and verbatim information (6, 7,10) and
previous research on vaccine communication has found that articles with gist were shared on social
media more than those without (22).
Some characteristics of the video are not as directly tied to recommendations from previous
literature on vaccine interventions, partly because there is not yet much evidence on interventions
specific for the COVID-19 vaccines. In some respects, the unique characteristics of the COVID-19
vaccine may alleviate some of the attitudes that have contributed to parental vaccine hesitancy for
childhood vaccinations. For instance, it has been hypothesized that the benefits of some
vaccinations may not seem tangible due to unfamiliarity with the harm of the preventable disease
(9,23), which may be less likely for COVID-19. However, there are new concerns particular to
COVID-19 vaccines that have been reported (2,21), and the video does address some of these,
including unease over the new vaccine platforms that have not been used before, and concern over
the speed of the vaccine development and approval (the video does not go into all of the details
that contributed to the rapid vaccine development but does explain that the mRNA platform may
allow quicker vaccine development than weakened virus platforms). Although previous research
has shown that vaccine hesitancy is often more complex than a simple knowledge deficit (10,19),
the overall tone of the video is an educational approach to influencing vaccination attitudes because
in the case of the COVID-19 vaccines, the lack of knowledge about the new vaccine platform
contribute to hesitancy.
Previous research has indicated that the messaging matters in addition to the message (24,25),
and has recommended that vaccine interventions use an enthusiastic tone (10) and establish the
public health educator as an expert (7). In this video, background music is used to create an
engaging and enthusiastic tone. Although the video does not specify the credentials of the creator,
the survey participants were told that the video was created by a college biochemistry professor.
This study tests the effectiveness of a video that draws upon the best evidence in the vaccine
hesitancy intervention literature for the message (information content) and messaging (style of
communication) of vaccine communications, and additionally allows us to study whether there may
be different patterns of effectiveness based on the messenger (the person who delivers the
message). Since the narrator is never depicted in the video, we saw the video as a platform to
isolate and test the effects of a single variable related to the messenger: the gender of the narrator’s
voice. Therefore, two versions were used in the study, identical but for the voice of the narrator: the
Female-Narr-Video version had a female voice reading the transcript and the Male-Narr-Video
version had a male voice. In both cases the timing of the narration was matched to the animations
(which led to a 3 second difference in length of the videos). The Female-Narr-Video was the original
version created in December 2020 for educational purposes (although the title slide and link on
YouTube were changed for this study), and the Male-Narr-Video was created later as an additional
. CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International licenseIt is made available under a
is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. (which was not certified by peer review)
The copyright holder for this preprint this version posted March 29, 2021. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.03.26.21254433doi: medRxiv preprint
5
experimental condition. In other words, the creation of the Female-Narr-Video was independent of
the idea of testing whether narrator gender might associate with its effectiveness; only after
receiving positive anecdotal feedback on the original video did we decide to study the efficacy of
such variations.
Survey design. Participants completed a survey to measure COVID-19 vaccination intention,
attitudes, and understanding. Many of the survey items were similar to validated items from the
literature, with some adaptations since many of the previous scales of vaccine hesitancy have been
used to measure parental attitudes towards childhood vaccinations (26). Using the Qualtrics survey
platform, participants were randomly equally distributed into one of 4 paths: In paths 1, 2, and 3 the
consent information page was followed by a page where participants watched the Male-Narr-Video,
the Female-Narr-Video, or read the text of the video transcript presented as a blog post. On each
of these pages, the time the participants spent on the page was recorded and advancing to the
next page was disabled for a few minutes (approximately for half of the length of the video and two
minutes for the approximately 1,200 word text) to increase the likelihood that participants engaged
the material. After the information was presented in the video or text format, the participants
encountered a section with questions that first asked about their intent to get vaccinated and then
asked about their attitudes concerning the COVID-19 vaccines. The participants in the 4
th
path did
not receive any information and went directly to the vaccine intention and attitudes section. The
vaccination intention item was based on the Imperial College London “Global attitudes towards a
COVID-19 vaccine” survey (4) and asked “If a COVID-19 vaccine were made available to you this
week, would you get it?” Response categories were: (1) Definitely no; (2) Probably no; (3)
Undecided as of now; (4) Probably yes; (5) Definitely yes; and (6) I already got one or more dose
of a COVID19 vaccine. This section also included questions on multiple domains related to vaccine
hesitancy attitudes: a) perceptions of vaccine safety and efficacy, b) trust in medical, scientific,
governmental and pharmaceutical authorities, c) common vaccine misconceptions and d)
understanding of elements of vaccination (see SI for full survey questions)
†
. The next section of the
survey asked about characteristics of the video or blog post, which included an attention check
question, questions about the enjoyment of the video/blog post, and how likely participants would
be to share it on social media, and was only shown to paths 1-3. This section also asked
participants to rate the quality of instruction by the narrator and on the narrator’s trustworthiness,
comfort and knowledge. All paths of the survey then went to a block of demographic questions and
ended with a code to enter for payment on Amazon Mechanical Turk.
Experimental set up. The survey was administered to 1,632 participants on Amazon Mechanical
Turk on February 25
th
and 26
th
, 2021 when the two approved COVID-19 vaccines in the United
States were the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna mRNA vaccines. The only worker qualification
required was that the Turk worker be located in the United States. Mechanical Turk is well-validated
and considered a reliable source for survey data (27-29). The pay was $5, based on a $15/h wage
and a 20-minute estimate of the average completion time. The study was approved by the
Macalester College Institutional Review Board (Approval #022103). Participants were provided with
consent information at the beginning of the study, although signed consent forms were not collected
to preserve the anonymity of the participants. The dataset used for this analysis is available in the
SI Appendix. Unless otherwise noted, the exclusion criteria that were applied were: exclusion of
participants who had indicated they had already been vaccinated, exclusion of participants who
answered the attention check question incorrectly, and exclusion of participants who spent less
than 7 min on the video page (for a 7 min 37 sec video) or who spent less than 2 min 5 sec on the
blog post page (which excluded a similar percentage of people for spending insufficient time as
were excluded for insufficient time for the video exposures). These exclusion criteria resulted in n
†
As the most direct measure of vaccine hesitancy is the vaccination intent survey item, the analyses in this
paper focus on the responses to that question. Subsequent research may examine the other survey items in
greater depth.
. CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International licenseIt is made available under a
is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. (which was not certified by peer review)
The copyright holder for this preprint this version posted March 29, 2021. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.03.26.21254433doi: medRxiv preprint
Citations
More filters
Journal Article•DOI•
The Effectiveness of Interventions for Increasing COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake: A Systematic Review

[...]

Eleonore Batteux, Freya Mills, Leah Jones, Charles Symons, Dale Weston 
01 Mar 2022-Vaccines
TL;DR: In this paper , a systematic review was conducted to identify and evaluate the effectiveness of interventions to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake, including personalizing communications and sending booking reminders via text message.
Abstract: Vaccination is vital to protect the public against COVID-19. The aim of this systematic review is to identify and evaluate the effectiveness of interventions to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake. We searched a range of databases (Embase, Medline, Psychology & Behavioral Science, PsycInfo, Web of Science and NIH Preprints Portfolio) from March 2020 to July 2021 for studies which reported primary quantitative or qualitative research on interventions to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake. Outcome measures included vaccination uptake and reported intention to vaccinate. Reviews, position papers, conference abstracts, protocol papers and papers not in English were excluded. The NHLBI quality assessment was used to assess risk of bias. In total, 39 studies across 33 papers met the inclusion criteria. A total of 28 were assessed as good quality. They included interventions relating to communication content, communication delivery, communication presentation, policy or vaccination delivery, with 7 measuring vaccination uptake and 32 measuring vaccination intention. A narrative synthesis was conducted, which highlighted that there is reasonable evidence from studies investigating real behaviour suggesting that personalising communications and sending booking reminders via text message increases vaccine uptake. Findings on vaccination intention are mixed but suggest that communicating uncertainty about the vaccine does not decrease intention, whereas making vaccination mandatory could have a negative impact. Although much of the research used experimental designs, very few measured real behavioural outcomes. Understanding which interventions are most effective amongst vaccine-hesitant populations and in the context of booster vaccinations will be important as vaccine roll outs continue across the world.

36 citations

Journal Article•DOI•
Interventions to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake: a scoping review

[...]

03 Aug 2022-Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
TL;DR: A scoping review of interventions aimed at increasing COVID-19 vaccine uptake and decreasing vaccine hesitancy is presented in this paper , where the authors identify and map a variety of heterogeneous interventions according to addressed populations and intervention categories.
Abstract: Background Vaccines are effective in preventing severe COVID‐19, a disease for which few treatments are available and which can lead to disability or death. Widespread vaccination against COVID‐19 may help protect those not yet able to get vaccinated. In addition, new and vaccine‐resistant mutations of SARS‐CoV‐2 may be less likely to develop if the spread of COVID‐19 is limited. Different vaccines are now widely available in many settings. However, vaccine hesitancy is a serious threat to the goal of nationwide vaccination in many countries and poses a substantial threat to population health. This scoping review maps interventions aimed at increasing COVID‐19 vaccine uptake and decreasing COVID‐19 vaccine hesitancy. Objectives To scope the existing research landscape on interventions to enhance the willingness of different populations to be vaccinated against COVID‐19, increase COVID‐19 vaccine uptake, or decrease COVID‐19 vaccine hesitancy, and to map the evidence according to addressed populations and intervention categories. Search methods We searched Cochrane COVID‐19 Study Register, Web of Science (Science Citation Index Expanded and Emerging Sources Citation Index), WHO COVID‐19 Global literature on coronavirus disease, PsycINFO, and CINAHL to 11 October 2021. Selection criteria We included studies that assess the impact of interventions implemented to enhance the willingness of different populations to be vaccinated against COVID‐19, increase vaccine uptake, or decrease COVID‐19 vaccine hesitancy. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), non‐randomised studies of intervention (NRSIs), observational studies and case studies with more than 100 participants. Furthermore, we included systematic reviews and meta‐analyses. We did not limit the scope of the review to a specific population or to specific outcomes assessed. We excluded interventions addressing hesitancy towards vaccines for diseases other than COVID‐19. Data collection and analysis Data were analysed according to a protocol uploaded to the Open Science Framework. We used an interactive scoping map to visualise the results of our scoping review. We mapped the identified interventions according to pre‐specified intervention categories, that were adapted to better fit the evidence. The intervention categories were: communication interventions, policy interventions, educational interventions, incentives (both financial and non‐financial), interventions to improve access, and multidimensional interventions. The study outcomes were also included in the mapping. Furthermore, we mapped the country in which the study was conducted, the addressed population, and whether the design was randomised‐controlled or not. Main results We included 96 studies in the scoping review, 35 of which are ongoing and 61 studies with published results. We did not identify any relevant systematic reviews. For an overview, please see the interactive scoping map (https://tinyurl.com/2p9jmx24). Studies with published results Of the 61 studies with published results, 46 studies were RCTs and 15 NRSIs. The interventions investigated in the studies were heterogeneous with most studies testing communication strategies to enhance COVID‐19 vaccine uptake. Most studies assessed the willingness to get vaccinated as an outcome. The majority of studies were conducted in English‐speaking high‐income countries. Moreover, most studies investigated digital interventions in an online setting. Populations that were addressed were diverse. For example, studies targeted healthcare workers, ethnic minorities in the USA, students, soldiers, at‐risk patients, or the general population. Ongoing studies Of the 35 ongoing studies, 29 studies are RCTs and six NRSIs. Educational and communication interventions were the most used types of interventions. The majority of ongoing studies plan to assess vaccine uptake as an outcome. Again, the majority of studies are being conducted in English‐speaking high‐income countries. In contrast to the studies with published results, most ongoing studies will not be conducted online. Addressed populations range from minority populations in the USA to healthcare workers or students. Eleven ongoing studies have estimated completion dates in 2022. Authors' conclusions We were able to identify and map a variety of heterogeneous interventions for increasing COVID‐19 vaccine uptake or decreasing vaccine hesitancy. Our results demonstrate that this is an active field of research with 61 published studies and 35 studies still ongoing. This review gives a comprehensive overview of interventions to increase COVID‐19 vaccine uptake and can be the foundation for subsequent systematic reviews on the effectiveness of interventions to increase COVID‐19 vaccine uptake. A research gap was shown for studies conducted in low and middle‐income countries and studies investigating policy interventions and improved access, as well as for interventions addressing children and adolescents. As COVID‐19 vaccines become more widely available, these populations and interventions should not be neglected in research.

7 citations

Journal Article•DOI•
A systematic review of communication interventions for countering vaccine misinformation

[...]

Hannah Whitehead, Clare E French, Deborah M Caldwell, Louise Letley, Sandra Mounier-Jack 
01 Jan 2023-Vaccine
TL;DR: The authors conducted a systematic review to identify and describe communications-based strategies used to prevent and ameliorate the effect of mis-and dis-information on people's attitudes and behaviours surrounding vaccination and examined their effectiveness.

6 citations

Journal Article•DOI•
Drivers of the Intention to Receive a COVID-19 Booster Vaccine: Insights from the UK and Australia

[...]

Kirsten Barnes, Ben Colagiuri
01 Oct 2022-Vaccines
TL;DR: In this paper , factors predicting the intention to receive a COVID-19 booster vaccine were investigated in two adult samples from the UK (N = 1222) and Australia (n = 1197) that were nationally representative on factors of age, gender, and geographic location.
Abstract: As the global pandemic perpetuates, keeping the population vaccinated will be imperative to maintain societal protection from the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) virus. However, while empirical evidence regarding predictors of the intention to receive a first COVID-19 vaccine has amassed, our understanding regarding the psychological and behavioral drivers of continued COVID-19 vaccination remains limited. In this pre-registered study (UK: AsPredicted#78370|Australia: AsPredicted#81667), factors predicting the intention to receive a COVID-19 booster vaccine were investigated in two adult samples from the UK (N = 1222) and Australia (N = 1197) that were nationally representative on factors of age, gender, and geographic location. High levels of booster intent were found (73% and 67%, respectively). Exploratory Structural Equation Modelling (ESEM) revealed three key predictors of the intention to receive a booster vaccine that emerged across both UK and Australian samples: concern regarding the COVID-19 virus, positive perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccines, and the perceived severity of side effects experienced to the last COVID-19 vaccine dose. Several additional factors (age, months since the last COVID-19 vaccine, familiarity with side effects, and regularly receiving the influenza vaccine) were present in the Australian dataset. These findings provide important evidence that targeting psychological perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccine and virus may serve to maintain participation in the COVID-19 vaccination programme, paving the way for future behavioural research in this area.

2 citations

Journal Article•DOI•
The Evaluation of Web-Based Communication Interventions to Support Decisions About COVID-19 Vaccination Among Patients With Underlying Medical Conditions: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

[...]

Minjung Lee, Bumjo Oh, Nan-He Yoon, S.H. Kim, Young-Il Jung 
20 Sep 2022-JMIR Research Protocols
TL;DR: Choi et al. as mentioned in this paper evaluated the effectiveness of a communication tool for patients with underlying medical conditions who should decide whether to receive a COVID-19 vaccine, which is fully automated, patient decision aid, and user-centered information (SMART-DA-α).
Abstract: Background The timeliness of raising vaccine acceptance and uptake among the public is essential to overcoming COVID-19; however, the decision-making process among patients with underlying medical conditions is complex, leading individuals to vaccine hesitancy because of their health status. Although vaccine implementation is more effective when deployed as soon as possible, vaccine hesitancy is a significant threat to the success of vaccination programs. Objective This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of a communication tool for patients with underlying medical conditions who should decide whether to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Methods This 3-arm prospective randomized controlled trial will test the effect of the developed communication intervention, which is fully automated, patient decision aid (SMART-DA), and user-centered information (SMART-DA-α). The web-based intervention was developed to help decision-making regarding COVID-19 vaccination among patients with underlying medical conditions. Over 450 patients will be enrolled on the web from a closed panel access website and randomly assigned to 1 of 3 equal groups stratified by their underlying disease, sex, age, and willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. SMART-DA-α provides additional information targeted at helping patients’ decision-making regarding COVID-19 vaccination. Implementation outcomes are COVID-19 vaccination intention, vaccine knowledge, decisional conflict, stress related to decision-making, and attitudes toward vaccination, and was self-assessed through questionnaires. Results This study was funded in 2020 and approved by the Clinical Research Information Service, Republic of Korea. Data were collected from December 2021 to January 2022. This paper was initially submitted before data analysis. The results are expected to be published in the winter of 2023. Conclusions We believe that the outcomes of this study will provide valuable new insights into the potential of decision aids for supporting informed decision-making regarding COVID-19 vaccination and discovering the barriers to making informed decisions regarding COVID-19 vaccination, especially among patients with underlying medical conditions. This study will provide knowledge about the common needs, fears, and perceptions concerning vaccines among patients, which can help tailor information for individuals and develop policies to support them. Trial Registration Korea Clinical Information Service KCT0006945; https://cris.nih.go.kr/cris/search/detailSearch.do/20965 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) DERR1-10.2196/42837
References
More filters
Book•
Regression Models for Categorical Dependent Variables Using Stata

[...]

J. Scott Long, Jeremy Freese
10 Sep 2014
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present a brief tutorial for estimating, testing, fit, and interpretation of ordinal and binary outcomes using Stata. But they do not discuss how to apply these models to other estimation commands, such as post-estimation analysis.
Abstract: Preface PART I GENERAL INFORMATION Introduction What is this book about? Which models are considered? Whom is this book for? How is the book organized? What software do you need? Where can I learn more about the models? Introduction to Stata The Stata interface Abbreviations How to get help The working directory Stata file types Saving output to log files Using and saving datasets Size limitations on datasets Do-files Using Stata for serious data analysis Syntax of Stata commands Managing data Creating new variables Labeling variables and values Global and local macros Graphics A brief tutorial Estimation, Testing, Fit, and Interpretation Estimation Postestimation analysis Testing estat command Measures of fit Interpretation Confidence intervals for prediction Next steps PART II MODELS FOR SPECIFIC KINDS OF OUTCOMES Models for Binary Outcomes The statistical model Estimation using logit and probit Hypothesis testing with test and lrtest Residuals and influence using predict Measuring fit Interpretation using predicted values Interpretation using odds ratios with listcoef Other commands for binary outcomes Models for Ordinal Outcomes The statistical model Estimation using ologit and oprobit Hypothesis testing with test and lrtest Scalar measures of fit using fitstat Converting to a different parameterization The parallel regression assumption Residuals and outliers using predict Interpretation Less common models for ordinal outcomes Models for Nominal Outcomes with Case-Specific Data The multinomial logit model Estimation using mlogit Hypothesis testing of coefficients Independence of irrelevant alternatives Measures of fit Interpretation Multinomial probit model with IIA Stereotype logistic regression Models for Nominal Outcomes with Alternative-Specific Data Alternative-specific data organization The conditional logit model Alternative-specific multinomial probit The sturctural covariance matrix Rank-ordered logistic regression Conclusions Models for Count Outcomes The Poisson distribution The Poisson regression model The negative binomial regression model Models for truncated counts The hurdle regression model Zero-inflated count models Comparisons among count models Using countfit to compare count models More Topics Ordinal and nominal independent variables Interactions Nonlinear models Using praccum and forvalues to plot predictions Extending SPost to other estimation commands Using Stata more efficiently Conclusions Appendix A Syntax for SPost Commands Appendix B Description of Datasets References Author Index Subject Index

4,703 citations

Journal Article•DOI•
Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students

[...]

Corinne A. Moss-Racusin1, John F. Dovidio, Victoria L. Brescoll1, Mark J. Graham, Jo Handelsman •
Yale University1
09 Oct 2012-Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
TL;DR: In a randomized double-blind study, science faculty from research-intensive universities rated the application materials of a student as significantly more competent and hireable than the (identical) female applicant, and preexisting subtle bias against women played a moderating role.
Abstract: Despite efforts to recruit and retain more women, a stark gender disparity persists within academic science. Abundant research has demonstrated gender bias in many demographic groups, but has yet to experimentally investigate whether science faculty exhibit a bias against female students that could contribute to the gender disparity in academic science. In a randomized double-blind study (n = 127), science faculty from research-intensive universities rated the application materials of a student—who was randomly assigned either a male or female name—for a laboratory manager position. Faculty participants rated the male applicant as significantly more competent and hireable than the (identical) female applicant. These participants also selected a higher starting salary and offered more career mentoring to the male applicant. The gender of the faculty participants did not affect responses, such that female and male faculty were equally likely to exhibit bias against the female student. Mediation analyses indicated that the female student was less likely to be hired because she was viewed as less competent. We also assessed faculty participants’ preexisting subtle bias against women using a standard instrument and found that preexisting subtle bias against women played a moderating role, such that subtle bias against women was associated with less support for the female student, but was unrelated to reactions to the male student. These results suggest that interventions addressing faculty gender bias might advance the goal of increasing the participation of women in science.

2,362 citations

Journal Article•DOI•
Inside the Turk Understanding Mechanical Turk as a Participant Pool

[...]

Gabriele Paolacci1, Jesse Chandler2•
Erasmus University Rotterdam1, University of Michigan2
03 Jun 2014-Current Directions in Psychological Science
TL;DR: The characteristics of Mechanical Turk as a participant pool for psychology and other social sciences, highlighting the traits of the MTurk samples, why people become Mechanical Turk workers and research participants, and how data quality on Mechanical Turk compares to that from other pools and depends on controllable and uncontrollable factors as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: Mechanical Turk (MTurk), an online labor market created by Amazon, has recently become popular among social scientists as a source of survey and experimental data. The workers who populate this market have been assessed on dimensions that are universally relevant to understanding whether, why, and when they should be recruited as research participants. We discuss the characteristics of MTurk as a participant pool for psychology and other social sciences, highlighting the traits of the MTurk samples, why people become MTurk workers and research participants, and how data quality on MTurk compares to that from other pools and depends on controllable and uncontrollable factors.

1,926 citations

Journal Article•DOI•
Generalized ordered logit/partial proportional odds models for ordinal dependent variables

[...]

Richard Williams1•
University of Notre Dame1
01 Feb 2006-Stata Journal
TL;DR: Gologit2 as discussed by the authors is a generalized ordered logit model inspired by Vincent Fu's gologit routine (Stata Technical Bulletin Reprints 8: 160-164).
Abstract: This article describes the gologit2 program for generalized ordered logit models. gologit2 is inspired by Vincent Fu's gologit routine (Stata Technical Bulletin Reprints 8: 160–164) and is backward...

1,805 citations

Journal Article•DOI•
Vaccine hesitancy: An overview

[...]

Eve Dubé1, Caroline Laberge, Maryse Guay, Paul Bramadat, Réal Roy1, Julie A. Bettinger •
Laval University1
12 Apr 2013-Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics
TL;DR: This review provides an overview of the phenomenon of vaccine Hesitancy and suggests the possible causes of the apparent increase in vaccine hesitancy in the developed world.
Abstract: Despite being recognized as one of the most successful public health measures, vaccination is perceived as unsafe and unnecessary by a growing number of individuals. Lack of confidence in vaccines is now considered a threat to the success of vaccination programs. Vaccine hesitancy is believed to be responsible for decreasing vaccine coverage and an increasing risk of vaccine-preventable disease outbreaks and epidemics. This review provides an overview of the phenomenon of vaccine hesitancy. First, we will characterize vaccine hesitancy and suggest the possible causes of the apparent increase in vaccine hesitancy in the developed world. Then we will look at determinants of individual decision-making about vaccination.

1,356 citations

Related Papers (5)
Nudges for COVID-19 voluntary vaccination: How to explain peer information?

[...]

01 Jan 2022-Social Science & Medicine
Shusaku Sasaki, Shusaku Sasaki, Shusaku Sasaki, Tomoya Saito, Fumio Ohtake 
Expanding the boundaries of vaccine discourse: impact of visual illustrations communication intervention on intention towards COVID-19 vaccination among victims of insecurity in Nigeria.

[...]

15 Jun 2021-Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics
Joel C. Ugwuoke, Felix Olajide Talabi, Omowale Adelabu, Bernice Oluwalanu Sanusi, Verlumun Celestine Gever, Chijioke Onuora 
Using immersive virtual reality to improve the beliefs and intentions of influenza vaccine avoidant 18-to-49-year-olds: Considerations, effects, and lessons learned.

[...]

29 Jan 2020-Vaccine
Glen Nowak, Nathaniel J. Evans, Bartosz W. Wojdynski, Sun Joo Grace Ahn, María E. Len-Ríos, Karen Carera, Scott Hale, Deborah McFalls 
An Investigation of Low COVID-19 Vaccination Intentions among Black Americans: The Role of Behavioral Beliefs and Trust in COVID-19 Information Sources.

[...]

02 Oct 2020-Journal of Health Communication
Chioma Woko, Leeann Siegel, Robert C. Hornik
COVID-19 Vaccination Attitudes and Intention: Message Framing and the Moderating Role of Perceived Vaccine Benefits.

[...]

23 Aug 2021-Journal of Health Communication
Porismita Borah, Juwon Hwang, Ying Chia Louise Hsu
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Q1. What are the contributions in "A randomized controlled trial of a video intervention shows evidence of increasing covid-19 vaccination intention" ?

( LSW made the YouTube video as a part of a series of instructional videos made for educational purposes, and has not, and does not plan to, generate revenue from the videos in this study ). 

Future studies that follow up on the theoretical implications of these data may further examine the ways that gender beliefs influence how members of the public respond to communication about science and medicine, and help guide interventions promoting vaccine uptake.