Broad Syntheses that include this review

loading
11 articles (11 References) loading Revert Studify

Systematic review

Unclassified

Nudging toward vaccination: a systematic review.

blocked
Journal BMJ global health
Year 2021
Links Pubmed DOI PubMed Central

This article is included in 1 Broad synthesis 44 Broad syntheses (1 reference)

This article includes 44 Primary studies 44 Primary studies (44 references)

Loading references information
BACKGROUND: Vaccine hesitancy (VH) and the global decline of vaccine coverage are a major global health threat, and novel approaches for increasing vaccine confidence and uptake are urgently needed. 'Nudging', defined as altering the environmental context in which a decision is made or a certain behaviour is enacted, has shown promising results in several health promotion strategies. We present a comprehensive synthesis of evidence regarding the value and impact of nudges to address VH. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review to determine if nudging can mitigate VH and improve vaccine uptake. Our search strategy used Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and non-MeSH terms to identify articles related to nudging and vaccination in nine research databases. 15 177 titles were extracted and assessed following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The final list of included articles was evaluated using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations framework. FINDINGS: Identified interventions are presented according to a framework for behaviour change, MINDSPACE. Articles (n=48) from 10 primarily high-income countries were included in the review. Nudging-based interventions identified include using reminders and recall, changing the way information is framed and delivered to an intended audience, changing the messenger delivering information, invoking social norms and emotional affect (eg, through storytelling, dramatic narratives and graphical presentations), and offering incentives or changing defaults. The most promising evidence exists for nudges that offer incentives to parents and healthcare workers, that make information more salient or that use trusted messengers to deliver information. The effectiveness of nudging interventions and the direction of the effect varies substantially by context. Evidence for some approaches is mixed, highlighting a need for further research, including how successful interventions can be adapted across settings. CONCLUSION: Nudging-based interventions show potential to increase vaccine confidence and uptake, but further evidence is needed for the development of clear recommendations. The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic increases the urgency of undertaking nudging-focused research. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020185817.

Systematic review

Unclassified

Visualizing risks in cancer communication: A systematic review of computer-supported visual aids.

blocked
Journal Patient Education and Counseling
Year 2017
Links Pubmed DOI

This article includes 13 Primary studies 13 Primary studies (13 references)

Loading references information
OBJECTIVE: Health websites are becoming important sources for cancer information. Lay users, patients and carers seek support for critical decisions, but they are prone to common biases when quantitative information is presented. Graphical representations of risk data can facilitate comprehension, and interactive visualizations are popular. This review summarizes the evidence on computer-supported graphs that present risk data and their effects on various measures. METHODS: The systematic literature search was conducted in several databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL. Only studies with a controlled design were included. Relevant publications were carefully selected and critically appraised by two reviewers. RESULTS: Thirteen studies were included. Ten studies evaluated static graphs and three dynamic formats. Most decision scenarios were hypothetical. Static graphs could improve accuracy, comprehension, and behavioural intention. But the results were heterogeneous and inconsistent among the studies. Dynamic formats were not superior or even impaired performance compared to static formats. CONCLUSIONS: Static graphs show promising but inconsistent results, while research on dynamic visualizations is scarce and must be interpreted cautiously due to methodical limitations. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Well-designed and context-specific static graphs can support web-based cancer risk communication in particular populations. The application of dynamic formats cannot be recommended and needs further research. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved)

Systematic review

Unclassified

Interventions to Improve HPV Vaccine Uptake: A Systematic Review.

blocked
Journal Pediatrics
Year 2016
Links Pubmed DOI

This article includes 53 Primary studies 53 Primary studies (53 references)

Loading references information
CONTEXT: The human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine is a safe, effective cancer prevention method that is underutilized in the United States. Despite increased understanding of barriers to vaccination, rates remain low. Globally, developed and developing nations have achieved high rates of vaccination. OBJECTIVE: Identification of effective strategies is necessary to optimize uptake of the HPV vaccine. We systematically reviewed the literature for national and international interventions that have successfully increased HPV vaccine uptake. DATA SOURCES: We used a standardized protocol to search for articles published between January 1, 2006, and April 30, 2015, in 3 electronic databases: PubMed, Scopus, and Embase. STUDY SELECTION: We identified interventions designed to increase HPV vaccine uptake among adolescents and young adults aged 11 to 26 years. All study designs were acceptable. Only articles that included postintervention vaccination rates were included. DATA EXTRACTION: Two authors independently reviewed each article for data extraction and quality assessment. Interventions were classified according to the Community Preventive Service Task Force guide. RESULTS: Results were reported according to the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance) framework. Fifty-one articles met eligibility criteria: 2 informational interventions, 18 behavioral interventions, and 31 environmental interventions. Factors associated with HPV vaccine uptake were increased vaccine availability, decreased financial barriers, and interventions targeting both providers and patients. LIMITATIONS: Lack of consistent RE-AIM metric reporting, limiting our ability to assess intervention validity and quality. CONCLUSIONS: Population-based vaccination strategies that increased vaccine availability reached the greatest number of adolescents and were most successful in achieving high rates of vaccination.

Systematic review

Unclassified

Parental reminder, recall and educational interventions to improve early childhood immunisation uptake: A systematic review and meta-analysis

blocked
Authors Harvey H , Reissland N , Mason J
Journal Vaccine
Year 2015
Links Pubmed DOI

This article includes 46 Primary studies 46 Primary studies (46 references)

Loading references information
Vaccination is one of the most effective ways of reducing childhood mortality. Despite global uptake of childhood vaccinations increasing, rates remain sub-optimal, meaning that vaccine-preventable diseases still pose a public health risk. A range of interventions to promote vaccine uptake have been developed, although this range has not specifically been reviewed in early childhood. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of parental interventions to improve early childhood (0-5 years) vaccine uptake. Twenty-eight controlled studies contributed to six separate meta-analyses evaluating aspects of parental reminders and education. All interventions were to some extent effective, although findings were generally heterogeneous and random effects models were estimated. Receiving both postal and telephone reminders was the most effective reminder-based intervention (RD=0.1132; 95% CI=0.033-0.193). Sub-group analyses suggested that educational interventions were more effective in low- and middle-income countries (RD=0.13; 95% CI=0.05-0.22) and when conducted through discussion (RD=0.12; 95% CI=0.02-0.21). Current evidence most supports the use of postal reminders as part of the standard management of childhood immunisations. Parents at high risk of non-compliance may benefit from recall strategies and/or discussion-based forums, however further research is needed to assess the appropriateness of these strategies.

Systematic review

Unclassified

Strategies for addressing vaccine hesitancy - A systematic review.

Journal Vaccine
Year 2015
Links Pubmed DOI

This article includes 174 Primary studies 175 Primary studies (174 references)

Loading references information
The purpose of this systematic review is to identify, describe and assess the potential effectiveness of strategies to respond to issues of vaccine hesitancy that have been implemented and evaluated across diverse global contexts. METHODS: A systematic review of peer reviewed (January 2007-October 2013) and grey literature (up to October 2013) was conducted using a broad search strategy, built to capture multiple dimensions of public trust, confidence and hesitancy concerning vaccines. This search strategy was applied and adapted across several databases and organizational websites. Descriptive analyses were undertaken for 166 (peer reviewed) and 15 (grey literature) evaluation studies. In addition, the quality of evidence relating to a series of PICO (population, intervention, comparison/control, outcomes) questions defined by the SAGE Working Group on Vaccine Hesitancy (WG) was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria; data were analyzed using Review Manager. RESULTS: Across the literature, few strategies to address vaccine hesitancy were found to have been evaluated for impact on either vaccination uptake and/or changes in knowledge, awareness or attitude (only 14% of peer reviewed and 25% of grey literature). The majority of evaluation studies were based in the Americas and primarily focused on influenza, human papillomavirus (HPV) and childhood vaccines. In low- and middle-income regions, the focus was on diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis, and polio. Across all regions, most interventions were multi-component and the majority of strategies focused on raising knowledge and awareness. Thirteen relevant studies were used for the GRADE assessment that indicated evidence of moderate quality for the use of social mobilization, mass media, communication tool-based training for health-care workers, non-financial incentives and reminder/recall-based interventions. Overall, our results showed that multicomponent and dialogue-based interventions were most effective. However, given the complexity of vaccine hesitancy and the limited evidence available on how it can be addressed, identified strategies should be carefully tailored according to the target population, their reasons for hesitancy, and the specific context.

Systematic review

Unclassified

What are the factors that contribute to parental vaccine-hesitancy and what can we do about it?

blocked
Authors Williams SE
Journal Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics
Year 2014
Links Pubmed DOI

This article is included in 1 Broad synthesis 15 Broad syntheses (1 reference)

This article includes 15 Primary studies 15 Primary studies (15 references)

Loading references information
Parental refusal or delay of childhood vaccines is increasing. Barriers to vaccination among this population have been described, yet less is known regarding motivating factors. Researchers are beginning to evaluate various approaches to address the concerns of "vaccine-hesitant" parents, but few studies have evaluated the effect of interventions on timely vaccine uptake. Several models for communicating with vaccine-hesitant parents have been reported for healthcare providers; however, the effectiveness and utility of these strategies has not been quantified. This article reviews the known barriers to vaccination reported by vaccine-hesitant parents and the current evidence on strategies to address parental vaccine hesitancy.

Systematic review

Unclassified

Educational interventions to increase HPV vaccination acceptance: a systematic review.

Journal Vaccine
Year 2014
Links Pubmed DOI PubMed Central

This article is included in 1 Broad synthesis 33 Broad syntheses (1 reference)

This article includes 33 Primary studies 33 Primary studies (33 references)

Loading references information
BACKGROUND: The Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine has been available for protection against HPV-associated cervical cancer and genital warts since 2006. Nonetheless, uptake has varied among countries and populations within countries. Studies have found that individuals' knowledge and attitudes toward the vaccine are associated with immunization uptake. The purpose of the current review is to summarize and evaluate the evidence for educational interventions to increase HPV vaccination acceptance. METHODS: We searched the databases of PubMed and Web of Science for English-language articles describing educational interventions designed to improve HPV vaccination uptake, intention or attitude. RESULTS: We identified 33 studies of HPV vaccination educational interventions: 7 tested the effectiveness of interventions with parents, 8 with adolescents or young adults, and 18 compared the effectiveness of different message frames in an educational intervention among adolescents, young adults or their parents. Most studies involved populations with higher educational attainment and most interventions required participants to be literate. The minority of studies used the outcome of HPV vaccine uptake. Well-designed studies adequately powered to detect change in vaccine uptake were rare and generally did not demonstrate effectiveness of the tested intervention. CONCLUSIONS: There is not strong evidence to recommend any specific educational intervention for wide-spread implementation. Future studies are required to determine the effectiveness of culturally-competent interventions reaching diverse populations.

Systematic review

Unclassified

Evidence-based risk communication: a systematic review.

blocked
Journal Annals of internal medicine
Year 2014
Links Pubmed DOI

This article is included in 1 Structured summary of systematic reviews 85 Structured summaries of systematic reviews (1 reference)

This article includes 84 Primary studies 85 Primary studies (84 references)

Loading references information
BACKGROUND: Effective communication of risks and benefits to patients is critical for shared decision making. PURPOSE: To review the comparative effectiveness of methods of communicating probabilistic information to patients that maximize their cognitive and behavioral outcomes. DATA SOURCES: PubMed (1966 to March 2014) and CINAHL, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (1966 to December 2011) using several keywords and structured terms. STUDY SELECTION: Prospective or cross-sectional studies that recruited patients or healthy volunteers and compared any method of communicating probabilistic information with another method. DATA EXTRACTION: Two independent reviewers extracted study characteristics and assessed risk of bias. DATA SYNTHESIS: Eighty-four articles, representing 91 unique studies, evaluated various methods of numerical and visual risk display across several risk scenarios and with diverse outcome measures. Studies showed that visual aids (icon arrays and bar graphs) improved patients' understanding and satisfaction. Presentations including absolute risk reductions were better than those including relative risk reductions for maximizing accuracy and seemed less likely than presentations with relative risk reductions to influence decisions to accept therapy. The presentation of numbers needed to treat reduced understanding. Comparative effects of presentations of frequencies (such as 1 in 5) versus event rates (percentages, such as 20%) were inconclusive. LIMITATION: Most studies were small and highly variable in terms of setting, context, and methods of administering interventions. CONCLUSION: Visual aids and absolute risk formats can improve patients' understanding of probabilistic information, whereas numbers needed to treat can lessen their understanding. Due to study heterogeneity, the superiority of any single method for conveying probabilistic information is not established, but there are several good options to help clinicians communicate with patients. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: None.

Systematic review

Unclassified

Barriers to Human Papillomavirus Vaccination Among US Adolescents: A Systematic Review of the Literature.

blocked
Journal JAMA pediatrics
Year 2014
Links Pubmed DOI PubMed Central

This article includes 39 Primary studies 39 Primary studies (39 references)

Loading references information
IMPORTANCE: Since licensure of the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine in 2006, HPV vaccine coverage among US adolescents has increased but remains low compared with other recommended vaccines. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the literature on barriers to HPV vaccination among US adolescents to inform future efforts to increase HPV vaccine coverage. EVIDENCE REVIEW: We searched PubMed and previous review articles to identify original research articles describing barriers to HPV vaccine initiation and completion among US adolescents. Only articles reporting data collected in 2009 or later were included. Findings from 55 relevant articles were summarized by target populations: health care professionals, parents, underserved and disadvantaged populations, and males. FINDINGS: Health care professionals cited financial concerns and parental attitudes and concerns as barriers to providing the HPV vaccine to patients. Parents often reported needing more information before vaccinating their children. Concerns about the vaccine's effect on sexual behavior, low perceived risk of HPV infection, social influences, irregular preventive care, and vaccine cost were also identified as potential barriers among parents. Some parents of sons reported not vaccinating their sons because of the perceived lack of direct benefit. Parents consistently cited health care professional recommendations as one of the most important factors in their decision to vaccinate their children. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Continued efforts are needed to ensure that health care professionals and parents understand the importance of vaccinating adolescents before they become sexually active. Health care professionals may benefit from guidance on communicating HPV recommendations to patients and parents. Further efforts are also needed to reduce missed opportunities for HPV vaccination when adolescents interface with the health care system. Efforts to increase uptake should take into account the specific needs of subgroups within the population. Efforts that address system-level barriers to vaccination may help to increase overall HPV vaccine uptake.

Systematic review

Unclassified

The relative persuasiveness of gain- and loss-framed messages for promoting vaccination: a meta-analytic review.

Authors O'Keefe DJ , Nan X
Journal Health communication
Year 2012
Links Pubmed DOI

This article includes 16 Primary studies 16 Primary studies (16 references)

Loading references information
Vaccination against disease is a powerful public health tool, and persuading people to be vaccinated is a correspondingly important challenge. A number of studies have compared the effectiveness of gain-framed and loss-framed appeals in this domain, often expecting gain-framed appeals to be more persuasive. A meta-analytic review (k = 32, N = 11,814), however, finds no significant difference in the persuasiveness of gain- and loss-framed appeals for encouraging vaccination. This conclusion is unaffected by differences in the phrasing of the outcomes invoked or by differences in the specific vaccination advocated. But the results contain a hint that parents might be more persuaded to vaccinate their children by loss-framed than by gain-framed appeals. Implications and directions for future research are discussed.