ArticleBMJ open2022
Engaging Canadians in evidence-based communication about vaccines: a scoping review protocol of immunisation support programs in Canada.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo identify, characterise and map the existing knowledge about (1) immunisation programmes that provide evidence-based support about vaccines to Canadians and reduce barriers to vaccination; and (2) barriers and facilitators to the delivery of immunisation support programmes.
introductionVaccine hesitancy is a complex issue that has significant repercussions for the health and safety of Canadians. Engaging in evidence-based communication about vaccines can reduce vaccine hesitancy and increase participation in immunisation programmes.
methodsThe Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews will be used for this scoping review. A comprehensive keyword search strategy was developed and translated for six electronic databases on 19 November 2021: CINAHL via EBSCOhost, APA PsycINFO via EBSCOhost, Academic Search Complete via EBSCOhost, Scopus, Medline via EBSCOhost and EmCare via Ovid. We will identify unpublished literature by searching websites listed in CADTH's Grey Matters checklist and other relevant sources in January 2022. Two independent raters will screen and extract data from identified material. Data will be presented in a tabular form. INCLUSION CRITERIA: We will consider Canadian programmes that target the general public and exclude papers targeting health professionals. Our review will not limit by vaccine type and will consider any intervention that aims to inform individuals about immunisation. Our primary concept involves mapping the characteristics of programmes (eg, programme description, delivery format) and our secondary concept will examine barriers and facilitators to programme delivery. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required as this study is a review of the published and publicly reported literature. Findings from this review will be disseminated to academic and health system stakeholders to inform immunisation programmes across a wide range of vaccine types and settings. We intend to use the results of this review to develop an immunisation support programme in Prince Edward Island, Canada.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.