ArticleNPJ vaccines2026
Effectiveness of "naturalness" value-based narrative intervention on vaccination acceptance in two randomized controlled trials.
Article in NPJ vaccines, 2026. 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.
- Vaccine communication: a critical review of foundations, challenges, and future directions.NPJ vaccines · 2026Review
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.
Funding
Abstract
Conventional vaccine risk communication, which emphasizes scientific facts about vaccine or disease risks, often overlooks laypeople's values and fails to increase vaccination acceptance. This study developed and tested a participant-informed, value-embedded narrative intervention to improve vaccination acceptance among Hong Kong parents and adults. Two message types were created: a standard message framing vaccines as a medical technology (Med-Tech) and a naturalness-oriented framing (Immune-Trainer), both incorporated narrative communication and imagination simulation. In Study 1, 631 parents were randomly assigned to control, Med-Tech, or Immune-Trainer groups. The Immune-Trainer group showed more positive affective attitudes, generated more naturalness-related cues, and reported higher intention and uptake of childhood influenza vaccination. Study 2, involving 2261 adults and an additional non-narrative, fact-based-only group, largely replicated these findings except for actual uptake. Immune-Trainer outperformed the fact-based-only messages. Significant effects on vaccination intentions and reported actual uptake were observed for influenza but not for COVID-19 vaccination across both samples.
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.