Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37829554›Full record

ArticleVaccine: X2023

An online RCT on behavioural expectations effects of COVID-19 certification policies in England.

Freya Mills, Holly Carter, Liza Benny, Matt Barnard, Charles Symons

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Vaccine: X, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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

5 authors.

Freya MillsBehavioural Science and Insights Unit, UK Health Security Agency, United Kingdom.
Holly CarterBehavioural Science and Insights Unit, UK Health Security Agency, United Kingdom.
Liza BennyEvaluation and Social Research Unit, UK Health Security Agency, United Kingdom.
Matt BarnardEvaluation and Social Research Unit, UK Health Security Agency, United Kingdom.
Charles SymonsBehavioural Science and Insights Unit, UK Health Security Agency, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the effects of different types of COVID-19 certification policy on subsequent behavioural expectations. Design: 4 × 2 between-subjects pre-registered randomised controlled trial. Method: In August 2022, participants ( Results: We found no main effects of setting or type of certification on expectation to receive the next dose of the COVID-19 vaccine, to receive the seasonal influenza vaccine, or to adhere to other protective measures, when controlling for baseline expectations. Conclusions: These findings suggest that it is unlikely that the concept of certification, however it is framed, alters inclinations in the English population towards COVID-19 and seasonal flu vaccination or inclinations towards adhering to other protective behaviours within settings to which certification would apply. These findings are based on a hypothetical scenario and should be interpreted with caution.

Indexed as

COVID-19 certificationLateral Flow testingProtective behavioursVaccination

Identifiers

PMID37829554
PMCPMC10565557

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.