Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29338782›Full record

Trial reportBMC public health2018

Evaluation of two health education interventions to improve the varicella vaccination: a randomized controlled trial from a province in the east China.

Yu Hu, Qian Li, Yaping Chen

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC public health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Acceptance of varicella vaccination.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2021
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Yu HuDepartment of Expanded Program on Immunization, Zhejiang Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention, No. 3399 Binsheng Road, Binjiang District, Hangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Qian LiDepartment of Expanded Program on Immunization, Zhejiang Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention, No. 3399 Binsheng Road, Binjiang District, Hangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Yaping ChenDepartment of Expanded Program on Immunization, Zhejiang Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention, No. 3399 Binsheng Road, Binjiang District, Hangzhou, People's Republic of China. zjmyscyp@163.com.
Zhejiang Center for Disease Control and Prevention · CN

Funding

This study was supported by the general medical research program of Zhejiang province in 2014 2014KYA240
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe evaluated the effect of two Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM)-based health educational interventions on varicella vaccine (VarV) vaccination among pregnant women in a province in the east China.

methodsA prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted among 200 pregnant women with ≥12 gestation weeks to test two interventions, including a messaging video and a messaging booklet. The participants were randomly assigned into the control group, the video group or the booklet group. The VarV coverage at 12 and 24 months old was compared among the children of the three groups and relative risks (RRs) were calculated, by using the coverage of the control group as reference. The timeliness of VarV was also assessed. Furthermore, differences in the effects on the knowledge and attitude of VarV vaccination between the two interventions was evaluated.

resultsThe VarV coverage of their children by 24 months of age was 86.4%, 76.1% and 56.7% for the video group, the booklet group and the control group, respectively. The relative risks (RRs) for the coverage of VarV at 24 months of age were 4.8 (95% CI: 2.06-11.3) for the video group and 2.4 (95% CI: 1.2-5.1) for the booklet group. The means of delays were 57.3 days in the video group, 76.9 days in the booklet group, and 100.6 days in the control group. The proportion of women who intended to vaccinate their children with VarV was higher in the video group than the booklet group (93.9% vs. 82.1%, p < 0.05).

conclusionsOur findings indicated that perinatal health education through booklet or video could improve the coverage and schedule adherence for children's VarV vaccination.

Indexed as

Perinatal CareAdultChickenpoxChickenpox VaccineChild, PreschoolChinaFemaleHealth EducationHumansInfantLikelihood FunctionsPamphletsPregnancyProspective StudiesRiskVaccination CoverageChickenpox VaccineEffectEvaluationHealth educationRandomized controlled trialVaricella vaccine

Identifiers

PMID29338782
PMCPMC5771153
OpenAlexW2782835863

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.