Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37457259›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2023

Do social media interventions increase vaccine uptake?

Francesca Maria Grosso, Maria Elisabetta Baldassarre, Roberto Grosso, Federica Di Mauro, Chiara Greco, Silvia Greco, Nicola Laforgia, Antonio Di Mauro

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article 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 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Francesca Maria GrossoDepartment of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Postgraduate School of Public Health, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Maria Elisabetta BaldassarreDepartment of Biomedical Science and Human Oncology, Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, Aldo Moro University of Bari, Bari, Italy.
Roberto GrossoPediatric Primary Care, National Pediatric Health Care System, Bari, Italy.
Federica Di MauroDepartment of Prevention, Local Health Authority of Bari, Bari, Italy.
Chiara GrecoDepartment of Biomedical Science and Human Oncology, Hygiene and Preventive Medicine (Public Health), Aldo Moro University of Bari, Bari, Italy.
Silvia GrecoDepartment of Pediatrics, Gabriele d'Annunzio University of Chieti and Pescara, Chieti, Italy.
Nicola LaforgiaDepartment of Biomedical Science and Human Oncology, Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, Aldo Moro University of Bari, Bari, Italy.
Antonio Di MauroPediatric Primary Care, National Pediatric Health Care System, Margherita di Savoia, Barletta-Andria-Trani, Italy.
University of Bari Aldo Moro · ITUniversity of Chieti-Pescara · ITUniversity of Milan · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The Italian mass COVID-19 vaccination campaign has included children aged 5-11 years as part of the target population since December 2021. One of the biggest challenges to vaccine uptake was vaccine hesitancy among parents and children's caregivers. Primary care pediatricians (PCPs), as the first point of contact between the National Health Service (NHS) and parents/caretakers, initiated various communication strategies to tackle this hesitancy. This study aims to evaluate the impact of a PCP-led social media intervention and a digital reminder service (DRS) on parental hesitancy regarding vaccinating their 5-11-year-old children against COVID-19. Methods: A prospective cohort study was designed, and the chosen target populations were parents and caretakers of children aged 5-11 years. Two PCP cohorts were recruited. The first group received a social media intervention and a DRS; while the second group did not. Both cohorts had access to traditional face-to-face and telephone-based counseling. The vaccination coverage rate in the two groups was evaluated. Results: A total of 600 children were enrolled. The exposed cohort (277 patients) received social media intervention, DRS, and counseling options (face-to-face and telephone-based), whereas the non-exposed cohort (323 patients) received only counseling options. In total, 89 patients from the exposed cohort did not receive any dose of the COVID-19 vaccine (32.5%), 165 were fully immunized (59.5%), and 23 received only one dose (8.5%). A total of 150 non-exposed patients did not receive any dose of the COVID-19 vaccine (47%), 147 were fully immunized (45.5%), and 24 only received one dose (7.4%). The difference between the two groups was statistically significant (chi square = 11.5016; Conclusion: Social media and DRS interventions had a positive impact on vaccine uptake and may be helpful in tackling vaccine hesitancy. Better-designed studies are needed to corroborate these findings.

Indexed as

COVID-19Social MediaVaccinesChildChild, PreschoolCOVID-19 VaccinesHumansProspective StudiesState MedicineCOVID-19 VaccinesVaccinesCOVID-19primary care settingsocial mediavaccine campaignvaccine hesitancy

Identifiers

PMID37457259
PMCPMC10340521
OpenAlexW4382602349

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.