Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28942455›Full record

ArticleMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2017

Fostering Flu Vaccination in Healthcare Workers: Forum Theatre in a University Hospital.

Alice Corsaro, Andrea Poscia, Chiara de Waure, Concetta De Meo, Filippo Berloco, Walter Ricciardi, Gianfranco Damiani, Patrizia Laurenti, Collaborating Group

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Alice CorsaroInstitute of Public Health, Hygiene Section, Catholic University of Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy.
Andrea PosciaInstitute of Public Health, Hygiene Section, Catholic University of Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy.
Chiara de WaureInstitute of Public Health, Hygiene Section, Catholic University of Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy.
Concetta De MeoInstitute of Public Health, Hygiene Section, Catholic University of Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy.
Filippo BerlocoRadioprotection and Hospital Hygiene Unit, Hospital Health Management, Gemelli Teaching Hospital Foundation, Rome, Italy.
Walter RicciardiInstitute of Public Health, Hygiene Section, Catholic University of Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy.
Gianfranco DamianiInstitute of Public Health, Hygiene Section, Catholic University of Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy.
Patrizia LaurentiInstitute of Public Health, Hygiene Section, Catholic University of Sacred Heart, Rome, Italy.
Collaborating Group, ,.
Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The World Health Organization recommends flu vaccination as the most effective way to prevent the disease and its severe outcomes and has established the minimum vaccination coverage for people at risk at 75%. Even though healthcare workers (HCWs) represent a strongly recommended target group for flu vaccination campaigns, the average coverage among them is still inadequate. In flu season 2015/2016, our University Hospital tested Forum Theatre (FT) as a new participative strategy to foster HCWs engagement regarding flu vaccination. The aim of this study was to evaluate HCWs' satisfaction with and perceived utility of FT. In 2015, five FT sessions were organized in hospital units which were considered at risk for flu based on the type of admitted patients. After each session, participants were asked to complete an assessment questionnaire. The χ² test or the t-test was used to compare the proportion of participants who were satisfied with the FT and considered it useful (utility score). Data was analyzed according to gender, profession, and age. In all, 16.5% of HCWs who worked in four out of five of the units identified, participated in the FT sessions. Questionnaire results indicated that 74% of spectators were satisfied with their experience and 70% considered this methodology a useful approach for other health issues. Gender, age, and profession did not influence satisfaction or utility scores. Participative strategies such as FT represent an innovative solution to increasing HCWs' awareness of the importance of flu vaccination and could positively impact their adherence to vaccination recommendations. FT can also be a meaningful HCW teaching tool for learning about and changing attitudes toward other clinic and public health issues.

Indexed as

AdultAttitude of Health PersonnelFemaleHealth PersonnelHospitals, UniversityHumansInfluenza, HumanInfluenza VaccinesItalyMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesVaccinationVaccination CoverageInfluenza Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID28942455
PMCPMC5627537
OpenAlexW2759309536

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.