Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32066407›Full record

Trial reportBMC public health2020

Limits of the social-benefit motive among high-risk patients: a field experiment on influenza vaccination behaviour.

Ozan Isler, Burcu Isler, Orestis Kopsacheilis, Eamonn Ferguson

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04230343 (Limits of the Social Benefit Motive Among High-risk Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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.

NCT04230343 nacompletednot on this map

Limits of the Social Benefit Motive Among High-risk Patients: a Field Experiment on Influenza

TypeinterventionalSponsorSB Istanbul Education and Research HospitalRan2016 to 2017Enrolled244ConditionsInfluenza Vaccine, Behavioral Intervention, Self-benefit, Social-benefitArmsSelf-benefit message, Other-benefit message
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Social competition drives collective action to reduce informal waste burning in Uganda.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Warming up cool cooperators.Nature human behaviour · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Ozan IslerCentre for Behavioural Economics, Society and Technology (BEST), School of Economics and Finance, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Brisbane, 4000, Australia.
Burcu IslerInfectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology Department, Sisli Hamidiye Etfal Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.
Orestis KopsacheilisCentre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics (CeDEx), University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK. orestis.kopsacheilis@nottingham.ac.uk.
Eamonn FergusonSchool of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, UK. eamonn.ferguson@nottingham.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7678-1451
University of Nottingham · GBThe University of Queensland · AU

Funding

Economic and Social Research Council ES/P008976/1H2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions 658186Turkish Science Foundation (TUBITAK) International Research Fellowship Programme 2014-20 B.14.2.TBT.0.06.01-214-6041
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInfluenza vaccine uptake remains low worldwide, inflicting substantial costs to public health. Messages promoting social welfare have been shown to increase vaccination intentions, and it has been recommended that health professionals communicate the socially beneficial aspects of vaccination. We provide the first test whether this prosocial vaccination hypothesis applies to actual vaccination behaviour of high-risk patients.

methodsIn a field experiment at a tertiary care public hospital in Istanbul, Turkey, we compare the effects of two motivational messages for promoting vaccination. Using a between-subjects single-blind experimental design patients were randomly assigned to frames emphasizing the vaccine's benefits to self (n = 125) or social benefits (n = 119). Free influenza vaccination was offered to each patient.

resultsAmong 222 patients who were not vaccinated for the season prior to the study (72% medically assessed to be at high risk), 42% in the self-benefit frame chose to receive a vaccination compared with 34% in the social-benefits frame, but the difference was not statistically significant (aOR = 1.63, 95% CI 0.90 to 2.95, p = 0.108). Reasons for vaccination focused primarily on self-benefit (67%) rather than social-benefit (5%). Exploratory analysis showed that the effect of messages depended on patient perception of risk group membership (aOR

conclusionsIn contrast to the literature observing intentions of low-risk populations, we found no evidence that social-benefit motivates actual vaccination behaviour among a high-risk patient population. Instead, those who self-categorize as being in the high risk group are more motivated by the self-benefit message. Our results suggest that a stratified approach can improve coverage: even if an emphasis on social-benefit could be effective among low-risk groups, an emphasis on self-benefit holds more promise for increasing vaccination in medical organizational settings where high-risk groups are prevalent.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04230343 Retrospectively registered on the 13th January 2020.

Indexed as

Influenza VaccinesPatient Acceptance of Health CareSocial BehaviorAdultFemaleHumansInfluenza, HumanIntentionMaleMiddle AgedRisk FactorsSingle-Blind MethodSurveys and QuestionnairesTreatment RefusalTurkeyVaccinationInfluenza VaccinesField experimentFramingInfluenzaNudgeRisk groupRisk perceptionsSocial benefitVaccination

Identifiers

PMID32066407
PMCPMC7027065
OpenAlexW3012897386

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.