Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37077191›Full record

Trial reportFrontiers in public health2023

The impact of educational interventions on COVID-19 and vaccination attitudes among patients in Michigan: A prospective study.

Maya Asami Takagi, Samantha Hess, Zachary Smith, Karissa Gawronski, Ayushi Kumar, Jacob Horsley, Nicholas Haddad, Bernard Noveloso, Stephen Zyzanski, Neli Ragina

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Frontiers in public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
7.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Maya Asami TakagiCentral Michigan University, College of Medicine, Mt. Pleasant, MI, United States.
Samantha HessCentral Michigan University, College of Medicine, Mt. Pleasant, MI, United States.
Zachary SmithCentral Michigan University, College of Medicine, Mt. Pleasant, MI, United States.
Karissa GawronskiCentral Michigan University, College of Medicine, Mt. Pleasant, MI, United States.
Ayushi KumarCentral Michigan University, College of Medicine, Mt. Pleasant, MI, United States.
Jacob HorsleyCentral Michigan University, College of Medicine, Mt. Pleasant, MI, United States.
Nicholas HaddadCentral Michigan University Medical Education Partners, Saginaw, MI, United States.
Bernard NovelosoCentral Michigan University Medical Education Partners, Saginaw, MI, United States.
Stephen ZyzanskiDepartment of Family Medicine and Community Health, School of Medicine, Case Western Reserve University, Saginaw, MI, United States.
Neli RaginaCentral Michigan University, College of Medicine, Mt. Pleasant, MI, United States.
Central Michigan University · USCase Western Reserve University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Mass vaccination serves as an effective strategy to combat the COVID-19 pandemic. Vaccine hesitancy is a recognized impediment to achieving a vaccination rate necessary to protect communities. However, solutions and interventions to address this issue are limited by a lack of prior research. Methods: Over 200 patients from 18 Michigan counties participated in this study. Each participant received an initial survey, including demographical questions and knowledge and opinion questions regarding COVID-19 and vaccines. Participants were randomly assigned an educational intervention in either video or infographic format. Patients received a post-survey to assess changes in knowledge and attitudes. Paired sample Results: Patients showed increased knowledge after the educational intervention in six out of seven COVID-19 topics ( Conclusion: The findings illustrate that educational interventions improved COVID-19 and vaccine knowledge among patients and that the knowledge was retained. Educational interventions serve as powerful tools to increase knowledge within communities and address negative views on vaccination. Interventions should be continually utilized to reinforce information within communities to improve vaccination rates.

Indexed as

COVID-19PandemicsHumansMichiganProspective StudiesVaccinationCOVID-19 attitudesCOVID-19 knowledgeCOVID-19 vaccinesCOVID-19 viruseducational interventionvaccine hesitancy

Identifiers

PMID37077191
PMCPMC10106744
OpenAlexW4362587472

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.