ArticleVaccine: X2024
E-mail as a way of communication during the ACWY meningococcal vaccination campaign in adolescents and young adults in the Region of Murcia.
Article in Vaccine: X, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In 2019, ACWY meningococcal vaccination for people born between 2001 and 2007 was recommended. In Murcia, during the first 9 months, the coverage was 52.89%. This study is aimed to evaluate the effects of e-mail reminders on vaccination coverage. A longitudinal, prospective trial was performed on non-vaccinated individuals with e-mail addresses. An e-mail reminder was sent to people assigned to the intervention group (born in any month, except January and July), and 4 weeks later, the same was sent to the control group. Vaccination coverage was assessed before and 4 weeks after each intervention. After the first intervention, 5.15% of the participants in the intervention group were vaccinated (1.57% in the control group). The increased likelihood of being vaccinated if a person had been sent an e-mail was 1.033 (95% confidence interval, 1.019-1.047; p = 0.001). This study highlighted the impact of e-mail as an appropriate method of communication for vaccination programmes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.