Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36884269›Full record

ArticleJMIR research protocols2023

The Good Talk! A Serious Game to Boost People's Competence to Have Open Conversations About COVID-19: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Javier A Elkin, Michelle McDowell, Brian Yau, Sandra Varaidzo Machiri, Shanthi Pal, Sylvie Briand, Derrick Muneene, Tim Nguyen, Tina D Purnat

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR research protocols, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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.

Javier A Elkin *Digital Health and Innovation Department, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7645-0230
Michelle McDowell *Harding Center for Risk Literacy, Faculty of Health Sciences Brandenburg, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1522-757X
Brian YauDepartment of Pandemic and Epidemic Preparedness and Prevention, World Health Organization Health Emergencies Programme, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4255-9243
Sandra Varaidzo MachiriVaccine Safety Project, African Field Epidemiology Network, Kampala, Uganda.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8440-1028
Shanthi PalDepartment of Regulation and Prequalification, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5778-9207
Sylvie BriandDepartment of Pandemic and Epidemic Preparedness and Prevention, World Health Organization Health Emergencies Programme, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6929-5335
Derrick MuneeneDigital Health and Innovation Department, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1101-6492
Tim NguyenDepartment of Pandemic and Epidemic Preparedness and Prevention, World Health Organization Health Emergencies Programme, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6186-9362
Tina D PurnatDepartment of Pandemic and Epidemic Preparedness and Prevention, World Health Organization Health Emergencies Programme, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0257-6631

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVaccine hesitancy is one of the many factors impeding efforts to control the COVID-19 pandemic. Exacerbated by the COVID-19 infodemic, misinformation has undermined public trust in vaccination, led to greater polarization, and resulted in a high social cost where close social relationships have experienced conflict or disagreements about the public health response.

objectiveThe purpose of this paper is to describe the theory behind the development of a digital behavioral science intervention-The Good Talk!-designed to target vaccine-hesitant individuals through their close contacts (eg, family, friends, and colleagues) and to describe the methodology of a research study to evaluate its efficacy.

methodsThe Good Talk! uses an educational serious game approach to boost the skills and competences of vaccine advocates to have open conversations about COVID-19 with their close contacts who are vaccine hesitant. The game teaches vaccine advocates evidence-based open conversation skills to help them speak with individuals who have opposing points of view or who may ascribe to nonscientifically supported beliefs while retaining trust, identifying common ground, and fostering acceptance and respect of divergent views. The game is currently under development and will be available on the web, free to access for participants worldwide, and accompanied by a promotional campaign to recruit participants through social media channels. This protocol describes the methodology for a randomized controlled trial that will compare participants who play The Good Talk! game with a control group that plays the widely known noneducational game Tetris. The study will evaluate a participant's open conversation skills, self-efficacy, and behavioral intentions to have an open conversation with a vaccine-hesitant individual both before and after game play.

resultsRecruitment will commence in early 2023 and will cease once 450 participants complete the study (225 per group). The primary outcome is improvement in open conversation skills. Secondary outcomes are self-efficacy and behavioral intentions to have an open conversation with a vaccine-hesitant individual. Exploratory analyses will examine the effect of the game on implementation intentions as well as potential covariates or subgroup differences based on sociodemographic information or previous experiences with COVID-19 vaccination conversations.

conclusionsThe outcome of the project is to promote more open conversations regarding COVID-19 vaccination. We hope that our approach will encourage more governments and public health experts to engage in their mission to reach their citizens directly with digital health solutions and to consider such interventions as an important tool in infodemic management. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/40753.

Indexed as

behavioral intentionscommunicationconversation skillsCOVID-19self-efficacyserious gamevaccine hesitancy

Identifiers

PMID36884269
PMCPMC9997707

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.