Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41386715›Full record

ReviewImmunology and cell biology2026

Effective communication and public engagement strategies to counter misinformation about infectious diseases.

Sheena Cruickshank, Martin McKee, Christina Pagel

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Immunology and cell biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

3 authors.

Sheena CruickshankLydia Becker Institute of Immunology and Inflammation, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3047-5475
Martin McKeeLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0121-9683
Christina PagelClinical Operational Research Unit, University College London, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2857-1628

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Effective communication and public engagement are essential components of infectious disease control, yet they remain underdeveloped in the field of immunology. This review explores how immunologists and scientists can contribute to countering misinformation and improving vaccine uptake through inclusive, culturally sensitive engagement. Drawing on historical and contemporary case studies, we examine how trust, cognitive biases, and community involvement shape public responses. We highlight the importance of co-produced messaging and the role of community champions in building trust, particularly among marginalized groups. Vaccine communication is analyzed through the lens of the five Cs: confidence, complacency, convenience, communication, and context. We discuss how demographic and structural barriers, historical mistrust, and politicization of health messaging contribute to declining vaccine uptake and propose tailored strategies to address these challenges. The final section focuses on data presentation as a core foundation of public communication, emphasizing that clarity, transparency, and ethical framing are critical to public understanding. We outline principles for designing trustworthy visuals, mitigating cognitive biases, and embedding context directly within graphics to prevent misinterpretation. Participatory approaches to data communication are shown to improve comprehension and trust, especially when co-developed with affected communities. Together, these domains-engagement, vaccine communication, and data presentation-form a foundation for resilient public health responses. By integrating immunological expertise with inclusive communication strategies, scientists can play a central role in fostering informed decision making and strengthening public cooperation in future outbreaks.

Indexed as

Communicable DiseasesCommunicationHealth CommunicationHumansTrustVaccinationVaccinesVaccinesCommunicationpublic engagementpublic health

Identifiers

PMID41386715
PMCPMC12872406

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.