Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38012315›Full record

Trial reportNature medicine2023

Financial incentives for COVID-19 vaccines in a rural low-resource setting: a cluster-randomized trial.

Raymond Duch, Edward Asiedu, Ryota Nakamura, Thomas Rouyard, Alberto Mayol, Adrian Barnett, Laurence Roope, Mara Violato, Dorcas Sowah, Piotr Kotlarz and 1 more

Erratum issuedOpen access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Nature medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 7 institutions in 6 countries.

Raymond DuchNuffield College, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. raymond.duch@nuffield.ox.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-1166-7674
Edward AsieduEdward Asiedu and Dorcas Sowah University of Ghana Business School, University of Ghana, Accra, Ghana.ORCID 0000-0003-0840-9233
Ryota NakamuraHitotsubashi Institute for Advanced Study, Hitotsubashi University, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-3217-6452
Thomas RouyardHitotsubashi Institute for Advanced Study, Hitotsubashi University, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0001-6412-1360
Alberto MayolDepartment of Public Administration, FAE University of Santiago Chile, Santiago, Chile.ORCID 0000-0002-2562-3285
Adrian BarnettQueensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Laurence RoopeUniversity of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9098-9331
Mara ViolatoUniversity of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0484-7706
Dorcas SowahEdward Asiedu and Dorcas Sowah University of Ghana Business School, University of Ghana, Accra, Ghana.
Piotr KotlarzNuffield College, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1652-5082
Philip ClarkeUniversity of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7555-5348
University of Oxford · GBHitotsubashi University · JPUniversity of Ghana · GHNuffield Orthopaedic Centre · GBQueensland University of Technology · AUThe University of Melbourne · AUUniversidad de Santiago de Chile · CL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We implemented a clustered randomized controlled trial with 6,963 residents in six rural Ghana districts to estimate the causal impact of financial incentives on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination uptake. Villages randomly received one of four video treatment arms: a placebo, a standard health message, a high cash incentive (60 Ghana cedis) and a low cash incentive (20 Ghana cedis). For the first co-primary outcome-COVID-19 vaccination intentions-non-vaccinated participants assigned to the cash incentive treatments had an average rate of 81% (1,733 of 2,168) compared to 71% (1,895 of 2,669) for those in the placebo treatment arm. For the other co-primary outcome of self-reported vaccinations 2 months after the initial intervention, the average rate for participants in the cash treatment was 3.5% higher than for participants in the placebo treatment (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.001, 6.9; P = 0.045): 40% (602 of 1,486) versus 36.3% (672 of 1,850). We also verified vaccination status of participants: in the cash treatment arm, 36.6% (355 of 1,058) of verified participants had at least one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine compared to 30.3% (439 of 1,544) for those in the placebo-a difference of 6.3% (95% CI: 2.4, 10.2; P = 0.001). For the intention and the vaccination outcomes, the low cash incentive (20 Ghana cedis) had a larger positive effect on COVID-19 vaccine uptake than the high cash incentive (60 Ghana cedis). Trial identifier: AEARCTR-0008775 .

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesHumansMotivationVaccinationCOVID-19 Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID38012315
PMCPMC10719106
OpenAlexW4389058612

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.