Suppr超能文献

关于 COVID-19 疫苗的公共卫生传播的实验预测试:医学认可、风险和利他主义的无效发现。

Experimental pre-tests of public health communications on the COVID-19 vaccine: A null finding for medical endorsement, risk and altruism.

机构信息

Behavioural Research Unit, Economic and Social Research Institute, Dublin, Ireland; School of Psychology, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland.

Behavioural Research Unit, Economic and Social Research Institute, Dublin, Ireland; School of Psychology, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland.

出版信息

Vaccine. 2022 Jun 15;40(27):3788-3796. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2022.05.029. Epub 2022 May 16.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Vaccination campaigns against COVID-19 will only be successful if enough people want to take the vaccine. We tested a government communications intervention to encourage uptake.

DESIGN

A pre-registered randomised controlled trial.

METHODS

A large, nationally representative sample were randomly assigned to see one of eight posters. The posters varied by image (general practitioner or two hospital doctors) and message (control with public health guidance not related to vaccination, endorsement of the vaccine from the pictured doctor, endorsement with information about COVID-19 risk, endorsement with information about risk and appeal to get vaccinated to protect friends and family). The posters were presented as part of a larger study. The main outcomes were intention to be vaccinated and how soon people would be willing to be vaccinated.

RESULTS

The posters induced different reactions indicating that participants had engaged with them. The hospital image was generally preferred to the GP image. Perhaps critically, all intervention messages were trusted less than a control message which did not mention the vaccine (Control Poster Mean = 5.65, SE = 0.09 vs. Poster M Mean = 5.18, SE = 0.09, p <.001; vs. Poster M + R Mean = 5.11, SE = 0.09, p <.001; vs. Poster M + R + F Mean = 5.33, SE = 0.09, p =.01). There were no effects of poster type on intention to take the vaccine or how soon people were willing to take it.

CONCLUSION

Although the intervention messages were based on the strongest correlates of vaccine hesitancy identified by contemporaneous surveys, none was effective. More recent research suggests that focusing on the risk of COVID-19 may be less effective than focusing on the benefits of vaccination. Null findings can be as important as positive findings for designing public health campaigns. This study informed government communications about the COVID-19 vaccine.

摘要

目的

只有当足够多的人愿意接种疫苗时,针对 COVID-19 的疫苗接种活动才能取得成功。我们测试了一项政府沟通干预措施,以鼓励接种。

设计

一项预先注册的随机对照试验。

方法

采用大样本、全国代表性样本,随机分配至 8 种海报中的一种。海报的差异在于图像(全科医生或两位医院医生)和信息(与疫苗接种无关的公共卫生指导的对照、图像医生对疫苗的认可、有关 COVID-19 风险的信息、有关风险和呼吁接种以保护朋友和家人的信息)。这些海报是作为一项更大研究的一部分呈现的。主要结果是接种疫苗的意愿以及人们愿意接种疫苗的时间。

结果

海报引起了不同的反应,表明参与者已经接触到了它们。医院的形象普遍比全科医生的形象更受欢迎。也许至关重要的是,所有的干预信息都不如不提疫苗的对照信息可信(对照海报均值=5.65,SE=0.09 与海报 M 均值=5.18,SE=0.09,p<.001;与海报 M+R 均值=5.11,SE=0.09,p<.001;与海报 M+R+F 均值=5.33,SE=0.09,p=.01)。海报类型对接种疫苗的意愿或人们愿意接种疫苗的时间没有影响。

结论

尽管干预信息是基于同期调查确定的疫苗犹豫的最强相关因素,但都没有效果。最近的研究表明,关注 COVID-19 的风险可能不如关注疫苗接种的好处有效。阴性结果对于设计公共卫生运动与阳性结果一样重要。这项研究为政府针对 COVID-19 疫苗的沟通提供了信息。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验