How text message reminders increase COVID-19 booster vaccine uptake: Two randomized controlled trials

IF 4.5 3区 医学 Q2 IMMUNOLOGY Vaccine Pub Date : 2024-11-18 DOI:10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.126533
Arne Meeldijk , Lisa Vandeberg , Reinier Akkermans , Jeannine Hautvast
{"title":"How text message reminders increase COVID-19 booster vaccine uptake: Two randomized controlled trials","authors":"Arne Meeldijk ,&nbsp;Lisa Vandeberg ,&nbsp;Reinier Akkermans ,&nbsp;Jeannine Hautvast","doi":"10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.126533","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Vaccines are effective and affordable health prevention measures to prevent vaccine-preventable diseases, but achieving sufficient vaccine uptake population-wide is challenging. In this work, we assess the impact of various text messages reminders on COVID-19 booster uptake and the extent to which the effect of messages holds over time. Additionally, we analyse whether people's self-reported vaccination intentions (measured in response to message prompts) corresponds to actual vaccine uptake and whether this relationship differs between message variants.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We performed two large sequential randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the Netherlands (<em>N =</em> 140.973), with the design of RCT2 building on the findings of RCT1. We 1) analyzed the effect of various text messages on COVID-19 booster uptake; 2) assessed the extent to which these effects hold over time; and 3) tested whether a positive response to message prompts moderates the effect of message variant on vaccine uptake.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>First, the results of RCT1 demonstrate that text messages with an <em>ownership frame</em> (“your [vaccine] is ready for you”) result in highest vaccine uptake (e.g., compared to no text message: OR = 1.28 [99 % CI 1.03–1.59]). RCT2 showed that text messages with an <em>ownership frame</em> and a <em>specific date</em>, <em>time and location</em> result in highest vaccine uptake (e.g., compared to no text message: OR = 2.10 [99 % CI 1.85–2.38]). Second, most message effects hold over a longer period of time (e.g., ‘date, time, location’ message versus no message: OR = 2.10 [99 % CI 1.85–2.38] on day 6 and OR = 1.36 [99 % CI 1.25–1.48] on day 50). Third, we find that participants who received our most effective text and replied that they will take the vaccine, are more inclined to actually take the vaccine compared to the message with broad opening hours OR = 2.86 [99 % CI 2.14–3.82].</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Text message reminders are able to increase vaccine uptake. From the tested variations, messages with an <em>ownership</em> frame providing a <em>specific date, time and location</em> are most effective. Because text messages demonstrate no notable disadvantages, we advise Public Health authorities to include this effective intervention in their vaccination campaign strategies.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":23491,"journal":{"name":"Vaccine","volume":"43 ","pages":"Article 126533"},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vaccine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X24012155","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Vaccines are effective and affordable health prevention measures to prevent vaccine-preventable diseases, but achieving sufficient vaccine uptake population-wide is challenging. In this work, we assess the impact of various text messages reminders on COVID-19 booster uptake and the extent to which the effect of messages holds over time. Additionally, we analyse whether people's self-reported vaccination intentions (measured in response to message prompts) corresponds to actual vaccine uptake and whether this relationship differs between message variants.

Methods

We performed two large sequential randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the Netherlands (N = 140.973), with the design of RCT2 building on the findings of RCT1. We 1) analyzed the effect of various text messages on COVID-19 booster uptake; 2) assessed the extent to which these effects hold over time; and 3) tested whether a positive response to message prompts moderates the effect of message variant on vaccine uptake.

Results

First, the results of RCT1 demonstrate that text messages with an ownership frame (“your [vaccine] is ready for you”) result in highest vaccine uptake (e.g., compared to no text message: OR = 1.28 [99 % CI 1.03–1.59]). RCT2 showed that text messages with an ownership frame and a specific date, time and location result in highest vaccine uptake (e.g., compared to no text message: OR = 2.10 [99 % CI 1.85–2.38]). Second, most message effects hold over a longer period of time (e.g., ‘date, time, location’ message versus no message: OR = 2.10 [99 % CI 1.85–2.38] on day 6 and OR = 1.36 [99 % CI 1.25–1.48] on day 50). Third, we find that participants who received our most effective text and replied that they will take the vaccine, are more inclined to actually take the vaccine compared to the message with broad opening hours OR = 2.86 [99 % CI 2.14–3.82].

Conclusion

Text message reminders are able to increase vaccine uptake. From the tested variations, messages with an ownership frame providing a specific date, time and location are most effective. Because text messages demonstrate no notable disadvantages, we advise Public Health authorities to include this effective intervention in their vaccination campaign strategies.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
短信提醒如何提高 COVID-19 加强免疫接种率:两项随机对照试验
背景:疫苗是预防可通过接种疫苗预防的疾病的有效且经济实惠的健康预防措施,但要在整个人群中实现足够的疫苗接种率却极具挑战性。在这项工作中,我们评估了各种短信提醒对 COVID-19 强化接种率的影响,以及短信效果随时间推移的保持程度。此外,我们还分析了人们自我报告的疫苗接种意向(根据短信提示测量)是否与实际疫苗接种率相符,以及这种关系在不同的短信变体之间是否存在差异:我们在荷兰进行了两项大型连续随机对照试验(RCTs)(N = 140.973),其中 RCT2 的设计以 RCT1 的结果为基础。我们1)分析了各种短信对COVID-19加强剂接种率的影响;2)评估了这些影响随时间推移的保持程度;3)测试了对短信提示的积极回应是否会调节短信变体对疫苗接种率的影响:首先,RCT1 的结果表明,带有所有权框架("您的[疫苗]已为您准备好")的短信导致疫苗接种率最高(例如,与无短信相比:OR = 1.28 [99 % CI 1.03-1.59])。RCT2 显示,带有所有权框架和具体日期、时间和地点的短信会导致最高的疫苗接种率(例如,与无短信相比:OR = 2.10 [99 % CI 1.85-2.38])。其次,大多数信息的效果在较长时间内保持不变(例如,"日期、时间、地点 "信息与无信息相比,OR = 2.10 [99 % CI 1.85-2.38]):第 6 天的 OR = 2.10 [99 % CI 1.85-2.38],第 50 天的 OR = 1.36 [99 % CI 1.25-1.48])。第三,我们发现,收到我们最有效的短信并回复将接种疫苗的参与者比收到开放时间宽泛的短信的参与者更倾向于实际接种疫苗,OR = 2.86 [99 % CI 2.14-3.82]:结论:短信提醒能够提高疫苗接种率。结论:短信提醒能够提高疫苗接种率。从测试的各种变体来看,带有所有权框架、提供具体日期、时间和地点的短信最为有效。由于短信没有明显的缺点,我们建议公共卫生部门将这一有效的干预措施纳入其疫苗接种活动策略中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Vaccine
Vaccine 医学-免疫学
CiteScore
8.70
自引率
5.50%
发文量
992
审稿时长
131 days
期刊介绍: Vaccine is unique in publishing the highest quality science across all disciplines relevant to the field of vaccinology - all original article submissions across basic and clinical research, vaccine manufacturing, history, public policy, behavioral science and ethics, social sciences, safety, and many other related areas are welcomed. The submission categories as given in the Guide for Authors indicate where we receive the most papers. Papers outside these major areas are also welcome and authors are encouraged to contact us with specific questions.
期刊最新文献
Mind the gap: A qualitative assessment of limitations in school-age immunisation programme delivery for Orthodox Jewish children in northeast London Differences in influenza vaccine effectiveness by sex among adults hospitalized with acute respiratory illness—IVY network, January 24, 2022–September 1, 2024 Next-generation live vector vaccine targeting Mycoplasma synoviae and Mycoplasma gallisepticum via recombinant Salmonella Editorial Board Active vaccine safety monitoring system using health insurance claims data in Japan: The Vaccine Effectiveness, Networking, and Universal Safety (VENUS) study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1