Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26895984›Full record

Trial reportBMJ open2016

Text messaging reminders for influenza vaccine in primary care: a cluster randomised controlled trial (TXT4FLUJAB).

Emily Herrett, Elizabeth Williamson, Tjeerd van Staa, Michael Ranopa, Caroline Free, Tim Chadborn, Ben Goldacre, Liam Smeeth

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 10 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 10 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Patient reminder and recall interventions to improve immunization rates.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018
    Pooled it
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Emily HerrettLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Elizabeth WilliamsonLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Tjeerd van StaaHealth eResearch Centre, Farr Institute, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK Faculty of Sciences, Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Clinical Pharmacology, Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Michael RanopaLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Caroline FreeLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Tim ChadbornHealth and Wellbeing Directorate, Public health England, Wellington House, London, UK.
Ben GoldacreLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, Centre for Evidence Based Medicine, University of Oxford, Radcliffe Observatory Quarter, Oxford, UK.
Liam SmeethLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_PC_13042Medical Research Council MR/K006584/1Medical Research Council MR/K006665/1Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectives(1) To develop methods for conducting cluster randomised trials of text messaging interventions utilising routine electronic health records at low cost; (2) to assess the effectiveness of text messaging influenza vaccine reminders in increasing vaccine uptake in patients with chronic conditions.

designCluster randomised trial with general practices as clusters.

settingEnglish primary care.

participants156 general practices, who used text messaging software, who had not previously used text message influenza vaccination reminders. Eligible patients were aged 18-64 in 'at-risk' groups.

interventionsPractices were randomly allocated to either an intervention or standard care arm in the 2013 influenza season (September to December). Practices in the intervention arm were asked to send a text message influenza vaccination reminder to their at-risk patients under 65. Practices in the standard care arm were asked to continue their influenza campaign as planned. BLINDING: Practices were not blinded. Analysis was performed blinded to practice allocation.

main outcome measuresPractice-level influenza vaccine uptake among at-risk patients aged 18-64 years.

results77 practices were randomised to the intervention group (76 analysed, n at-risk patients=51,121), 79 to the standard care group (79 analysed, n at-risk patients=51,136). The text message increased absolute vaccine uptake by 2.62% (95% CI -0.09% to 5.33%), p=0.058, though this could have been due to chance. Within intervention clusters, a median 21.0% (IQR 10.2% to 47.0%) of eligible patients were sent a text message. The number needed to treat was 7.0 (95% CI -0.29 to 14.3).

conclusionsPatient follow-up using routine electronic health records is a low cost method of conducting cluster randomised trials. Text messaging reminders are likely to result in modest improvements in influenza vaccine uptake, but levels of patients being texted need to markedly increase if text messaging reminders are to have much effect. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN48840025.

Indexed as

Reminder SystemsText MessagingAdolescentAdultElectronic Health RecordsFemaleGeneral PracticeHumansImmunization ProgramsInfluenza, HumanInfluenza VaccinesMaleMiddle AgedPrimary Health CareYoung AdultInfluenza VaccinesPUBLIC HEALTH

Identifiers

PMID26895984
PMCPMC4762100

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.