Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14279/24045
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLawes-Wickwar, Sadie-
dc.contributor.authorGhio, Daniela-
dc.contributor.authorTang, Mei Yee-
dc.contributor.authorKeyworth, Chris-
dc.contributor.authorStanescu, Sabina-
dc.contributor.authorWestbrook, Juliette-
dc.contributor.authorJenkinson, Elizabeth-
dc.contributor.authorKassianos, Angelos P.-
dc.contributor.authorScanlan, Daniel-
dc.contributor.authorGarnett, Natalie-
dc.contributor.authorLaidlaw, Lynn-
dc.contributor.authorHowlett, Neil-
dc.contributor.authorCarr, Natalie-
dc.contributor.authorStanulewicz, Natalia-
dc.contributor.authorGuest, Ella-
dc.contributor.authorWatson, Daniella-
dc.contributor.authorSutherland, Lisa-
dc.contributor.authorByrne-Davis, Lucie-
dc.contributor.authorChater, Angel-
dc.contributor.authorHart, Jo-
dc.contributor.authorArmitage, Christopher J.-
dc.contributor.authorShorter, Gillian W-
dc.contributor.authorSwanson, Vivien-
dc.contributor.authorEpton, Tracy-
dc.date.accessioned2022-02-14T09:43:59Z-
dc.date.available2022-02-14T09:43:59Z-
dc.date.issued2021-01-20-
dc.identifier.citationVaccines, 2021, vol. 9, no. 2, articl. no. 72en_US
dc.identifier.issn2076393X-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14279/24045-
dc.description.abstractPublic health teams need to understand how the public responds to vaccination messages in a pandemic or epidemic to inform successful campaigns encouraging the uptake of new vaccines as they become available. A rapid systematic review was performed by searching PsycINFO, MEDLINE, healthevidence.org, OSF Preprints and PsyArXiv Preprints in May 2020 for studies including at least one health message promoting vaccine uptake of airborne-, droplet- and fomite-spread viruses. Included studies were assessed for quality using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) or the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR), and for patient and public involvement (PPI) in the research. Thirty-five articles were included. Most reported messages for seasonal influenza (n = 11; 31%) or H1N1 (n = 11; 31%). Evidence from moderate to high quality studies for improving vaccine uptake included providing information about virus risks and vaccination safety, as well as addressing vaccine misunderstandings, offering vaccination reminders, including vaccination clinic details, and delivering mixed media campaigns across hospitals or communities. Behavioural influences (beliefs and intentions) were improved when: shorter, risk-reducing or relative risk framing messages were used; the benefits of vaccination to society were emphasised; and beliefs about capability and concerns among target populations (e.g., vaccine safety) were addressed. Clear, credible, messages in a language target groups can understand were associated with higher acceptability. Two studies (6%) described PPI in the research process. Future campaigns should consider the beliefs and information needs of target populations in their design, including ensuring that vaccine eligibility and availability is clear, and messages are accessible. More high quality research is needed to demonstrate the effects of messaging interventions on actual vaccine uptake.en_US
dc.formatpdfen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.relation.ispartofVaccinesen_US
dc.rights© by the authorsen_US
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/*
dc.subjectPublic health messagingen_US
dc.subjectVaccine uptakeen_US
dc.subjectVaccine hesitancyen_US
dc.subjectPandemicsen_US
dc.subjectEpidemicsen_US
dc.subjectSystematic reviewen_US
dc.titleA Rapid Systematic Review of Public Responses to Health Messages Encouraging Vaccination against Infectious Diseases in a Pandemic or Epidemicen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.collaborationUniversity College Londonen_US
dc.collaborationUniversity of Salforden_US
dc.collaborationNewcastle Universityen_US
dc.collaborationThe University of Manchesteren_US
dc.collaborationUniversity of Southamptonen_US
dc.collaborationUniversity of the West of Englanden_US
dc.collaborationEducation Support, Londonen_US
dc.collaborationHealth Psychology Exchange Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) Groupen_US
dc.collaborationUniversity of Hertfordshireen_US
dc.collaborationManchester Metropolitan Universityen_US
dc.collaborationDe Montfort Universityen_US
dc.collaborationBehavioural Insight, Edinburghen_US
dc.collaborationUniversity of Bedfordshireen_US
dc.collaborationManchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trusten_US
dc.collaborationManchester Academic Health Science Centreen_US
dc.collaborationQueen’s University Belfasten_US
dc.collaborationUniversity of Stirlingen_US
dc.subject.categoryHealth Sciencesen_US
dc.journalsOpen Accessen_US
dc.countryUnited Kingdomen_US
dc.countryCyprusen_US
dc.subject.fieldMedical and Health Sciencesen_US
dc.publicationPeer Revieweden_US
dc.identifier.doi10.3390/vaccines9020072en_US
dc.identifier.pmid33498395-
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85099948150-
dc.identifier.urlhttps://api.elsevier.com/content/abstract/scopus_id/85099948150-
dc.relation.issue2en_US
dc.relation.volume9en_US
cut.common.academicyear2020-2021en_US
item.languageiso639-1en-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.grantfulltextopen-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501-
item.fulltextWith Fulltext-
item.openairetypearticle-
crisitem.author.deptDepartment of Nursing-
crisitem.author.facultyFaculty of Health Sciences-
crisitem.author.orcid0000-0001-6428-2623-
crisitem.author.parentorgFaculty of Health Sciences-
Appears in Collections:Άρθρα/Articles
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat
vaccines-09-00072-v2.pdf742.02 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
CORE Recommender
Show simple item record

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

45
checked on Feb 2, 2024

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

37
Last Week
0
Last month
0
checked on Oct 29, 2023

Page view(s)

215
Last Week
2
Last month
3
checked on Jun 13, 2024

Download(s)

265
checked on Jun 13, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons