Motivating COVID-19 Vaccination through Persuasive Communication: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

COVID-19 Vaccination Messengers, Communication Channels, and Messages Trusted Among Black Communities in the USA: a Review

Black and African American adults exhibited higher levels of mistrust and vaccine hesitancy and lower levels of vaccination throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Vaccination and booster uptake remains disproportionately low among Black adults. We conducted a systematic review of empirical research published between February 2021 and July 2022 from five electronic databases and the grey literature. We screened studies that assessed COVID-19 vaccination information needs and preferences as well as communication strategies among Black adults in the USA. We extracted data, then analyzed and synthesized results narratively. Twenty-two articles were included: 2 interventions, 3 experimental surveys, 7 observational surveys, 8 qualitative inquiries, and 2 mixed methods studies. Studies reported credible and preferred COVID-19 vaccination information sources/messengers, channels, and content. Commonly trusted messengers included personal health care providers, social network connections, and church/faith leaders. Electronic outreach (e.g., email, text messages), community events (e.g., forums, canvassing), and social media were popular. Black communities wanted hopeful, fact-based messages that address racism and mistrust; persuasive messages using collective appeals about protecting others may be more influential in changing behavior. Future communication strategies aiming to increase vaccine confidence and encourage COVID-19 booster vaccination among Black communities should be developed in partnership with community leaders and local health care providers to disseminate trauma-informed messages with transparent facts and collective action appeals across multiple in-person and electronic channels.

The Resilience of Attitude Toward Vaccination: Web-Based Randomized Controlled Trial on the Processing of Misinformation

BACKGROUND

Before the COVID-19 pandemic, it was already recognized that internet-based misinformation and disinformation could influence individuals to refuse or delay vaccination for themselves, their families, or their children. Reinformation, which refers to hyperpartisan and ideologically biased content, can propagate polarizing messages on vaccines, thereby contributing to vaccine hesitancy even if it is not outright disinformation.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the impact of reinformation on vaccine hesitancy. Specifically, the goal was to investigate how misinformation presented in the style and layout of a news article could influence the perceived tentativeness (credibility) of COVID-19 vaccine information and confidence in COVID-19 vaccination.

METHODS

We conducted a web-based randomized controlled trial by recruiting English-speaking Canadians aged 18 years and older from across Canada through the Qualtrics (Silver Lake) paid opt-in panel system. Participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 distinct versions of a news article on COVID-19 vaccines, each featuring variations in writing style and presentation layout. After reading the news article, participants self-assessed the tentativeness of the information provided, their confidence in COVID-19 vaccines, and their attitude toward vaccination in general.

RESULTS

The survey included 537 participants, with 12 excluded for not meeting the task completion time. The final sample comprised 525 participants distributed about equally across the 4 news article versions. Chi-square analyses revealed a statistically significant association between general attitude toward vaccination and the perceived tentativeness of the information about COVID-19 vaccines included in the news article (χ21=37.8, P<.001). The effect size was small to moderate, with Cramer V=0.27. An interaction was found between vaccine attitude and writing style (χ21=6.2, P=.01), with a small effect size, Cramer V=0.11. In addition, a Pearson correlation revealed a significant moderate to strong correlation between perceived tentativeness and confidence in COVID-19 vaccination, r(523)=0.48, P<.001. The coefficient of determination (r2) was 0.23, indicating that 23% of the variance in perceived tentativeness was explained by confidence in COVID-19 vaccines. In comparing participants exposed to a journalistic-style news article with those exposed to an ideologically biased article, Cohen d was calculated to be 0.38, indicating a small to medium effect size for the difference in the perceived tentativeness between these groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Exposure to a news article conveying misinformation may not be sufficient to change an individual's level of vaccine hesitancy. The study reveals that the predominant factor in shaping individuals' perceptions of COVID-19 vaccines is their attitude toward vaccination in general. This attitude also moderates the influence of writing style on perceived tentativeness; the stronger one's opposition to vaccines, the less pronounced the impact of writing style on perceived tentativeness.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

RR2-10.2196/41012.

Enhancing COVID-19 Vaccination Awareness and Uptake in the Post-PHEIC Era: A Narrative Review of Physician-Level and System-Level Strategies

Following the World Health Organization's declaration that the COVID-19 pandemic is no longer a public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC), COVID-19 remains an ongoing threat to human health and healthcare systems. Vaccination plays a crucial role in reducing the disease's incidence, mitigating its severity, and limiting transmission, contributing to long-term public health resilience. However, incomplete vaccination coverage and vaccine hesitancy exist. This narrative review investigates strategies at the system and physician levels aimed at sustaining awareness and uptake of COVID-19 vaccination in a post-PHEIC era. Through an examination of the existing literature, this review explores the effectiveness of diverse approaches utilized by healthcare systems and individual providers. These approaches address every component of the 5C model of vaccine hesitancy: confidence, complacency, constraints/convenience, calculation, and collective responsibility. Physician-level approaches include appropriate message framing, persuasive communication containing safety and personal/social benefit information, sharing of personal stories, creating a safe space for discussion, harnessing co-administration with annual influenza vaccines, and use of decision aids and visual messages. System-level approaches include messaging, mass media for health communication, on-site vaccine availability, pharmacist delivery, healthcare protocol integration, incentives, and chatbot use.

Effects of Message Framing and Narrative Format on Promoting Persuasive Conversations with Others About the Flu Vaccine

This study examines the effects of message framing (loss vs. gain) and format (narrative vs. expository) on intentions to discuss flu vaccination with a close social referent. We test the effects of video messages using a two-wave web-based randomized experiment among adults in Israel (baseline: N = 429, one-month follow-up: N = 241). Exposure to narrative messages was positively associated with intentions to discuss flu vaccination. Exposure to loss-framed messages was positively associated with increased likelihood of discussing vaccination with the referent at follow-up. Effects of message framing and format were moderated by concern for the referent's health. Findings support the use of persuasive messages to motivate interpersonal conversation to promote vaccination. Results contribute to theory on risk-framing by showing that audiences may evaluate loss-framed messages according to their risk perceptions, when greater concern for health risks motivate action, not only for one's own health but for another person's health.

Experiences of Governments and Public Health Agencies Regarding Crisis Communication During the COVID-19 Pandemic in the Digital Age: Protocol for a Systematic Review of Qualitative Studies

BACKGROUND

Governments and public health agencies worldwide experienced difficulties with social media-mediated infodemics on the internet during the COVID-19 pandemic. Existing public health crisis communication strategies need to be updated. However, crisis communication experiences of governments and public health agencies worldwide during the COVID-19 pandemic have not been systematically compiled, necessitating updated crisis communication strategies.

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aims to collect and organize the crisis communication experiences of senders (ie, governments and public health agencies) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our focus is on exploring the difficulties that governments and public health agencies experienced, best practices in crisis communication by governments and public health agencies during the COVID-19 pandemic in times of infodemic, and challenges that should be overcome in future public health crises.

METHODS

We plan to begin the literature search on May 1, 2024. We will search PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, Communication Abstracts, and Web of Science. We will filter our database searches to search from the year 2020 and beyond. We will use a combination of keywords by referring to the SPIDER (Sample, Phenomenon of Interest, Design, Evaluation, and Research type) tool to search the abstracts in databases. We intend to include qualitative studies on crisis communication by governments and public health agencies (eg, officials, staff, health professionals, and researchers) to the public. Quantitative data-based studies will be excluded. Only papers written in English will be included. Data on study characteristics, study aim, participant characteristics, methodology, theoretical framework, object of crisis communication, and key results will be extracted. The methodological quality of eligible studies will be assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklist for qualitative research. A total of 2 independent reviewers will share responsibility for screening publications, data extraction, and quality assessment. Disagreement will be resolved through discussion, and the third reviewer will be consulted, if necessary. The findings will be summarized in a table and a conceptual diagram and synthesized in a descriptive and narrative review.

RESULTS

The results will be systematically integrated and presented in a way that corresponds to our research objectives and interests. We expect the results of this review to be submitted for publication by the end of 2024.

CONCLUSIONS

To our knowledge, this will be the first systematic review of the experiences of governments and public health agencies regarding their crisis communication to the public during the COVID-19 pandemic. This review will contribute to the future improvement of the guidelines for crisis communication by governments and public health agencies to the public.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42024528975; https://tinyurl.com/4fjmd8te.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

PRR1-10.2196/58040.

Factors in COVID-19 vaccine uptake in five racial/ethnic Colorado communities: A report from the Colorado CEAL project

PURPOSE

To understand motivators, concerns, and factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine initiation for adults in five racial/ethnic communities across Colorado.

METHODS

Community-based data collectors surveyed participants from five Colorado communities (urban and rural Latina/o/x, urban Black, rural African American immigrant, and urban American Indian) about vaccine attitudes, intentions, and uptake from September to December 2021. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression models were used to examine factors associated with the primary outcome of COVID-19 vaccine "initiation."

RESULTS

Most participants (71.1%) reported having initiated COVID-19 vaccination; vaccine series completion was 65.1%. Both motivators and concerns about COVID-19 vaccines were prevalent. Vaccine hesitancy (OR: 0.41, 95% CI:0.32-0.53; p < .001) and low perceptions of COVID-19 vaccination social norms (OR: 0.48, 95% CI:0.27-0.84; p = .01) were associated with vaccine initiation.

CONCLUSION

Despite the limitation of a moderate sample size, our findings support the need for further interventions to increase vaccination against COVID-19 by reducing vaccine hesitancy and improving perceived social norms of vaccination in underserved Colorado communities.

IMPLICATIONS

To improve trust in vaccines and promote vaccine uptake, community messaging should be tailored to vaccination motivators and concerns and demonstrate COVID-19 vaccination as the community default.

COVID-19 vaccination communication: Effects of vaccine conspiracy beliefs and message framing among black and white participants

BACKGROUND

The importance of vaccination in combating the COVID-19 pandemic is widely acknowledged. The aim of this study was (1) to understand how one's vaccine conspiracy beliefs would influence their public health news processing, (2) to examine how specific public health news features (i.e., news frame) would influence message processing, and (3) to examine if there were any differences between Black and White participants in their message processing.

METHODS

A nationwide online experiment (N = 821) with a 3 (vaccine conspiracy beliefs: high vs. moderate vs. low) × 2 (participants' race: Black vs. White) × 2 (news frames: gain vs. loss) mixed-factorial design was conducted in the United States.

RESULTS

Participants' level of vaccine conspiracy beliefs was predictive of their responses to outcome measures. Additionally, Black participants reported higher perceived message effectiveness, more favorable attitudes toward the message, and higher vaccination intentions than White participants. Furthermore, health news that emphasized vaccination benefits produced more favorable attitudes than those emphasizing losses associated with non-vaccination, especially for White participants. Lastly, participants reported more favorable attitudes toward gain-framed health news regardless of their vaccine conspiracy beliefs.

CONCLUSION

It is crucial for health officials to work to find effective media message strategies to combat COVID-19 vaccine conspiracy theories and misinformation. Furthermore, this study supports the significance of health organizations' ongoing efforts to tailor public health messaging to specific racial groups, as evidenced by considerable variations in perceptions among Black and White Americans.

Communication Strategies to Promote COVID-19 Vaccination Intention: How Effective are Source, Appeal, Framing, and Evidence Type Approaches?

This systematic review analyzed the effectiveness of key persuasive strategies - source, appeal, framing, and evidence (SAFE) - on COVID-19 vaccination intention. Quantitative studies were searched in Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed following the PRISMA guidelines. From the 61 studies that met inclusion criteria, source and framing are the most commonly applied SAFE strategies. However, source characteristics are a more consistent influence on vaccine intentions than message framing strategies, with expert sources and general practitioners emerging as the key sources contributing to greater vaccine intentions. In addition, a range of mediators and moderators influence the process through which SAFE message strategies impact vaccine intentions. Framing effects, in particular, are moderated by political identity, source characteristics, and vaccine perceptions. Tests of mediating processes highlight how health behavior judgments (e.g. perceived vaccine benefits, risks, trust in vaccination, perceived severity) and message response/perceptions (e.g. counterarguing, perceived similarity/empathy) operate as key intervening factors between SAFE message strategies and vaccine intentions. Overall, when practitioners apply various structural approaches (narrative elements, fear appeals, framing cues) to vaccine promotion campaigns, they should be cognizant of who is providing that appeal. Targeted populations may benefit most from different structural elements if they are integrated with sources that resonate with the audience.

"It's not that I don't trust vaccines, I just don't think I need them": Perspectives on COVID-19 vaccination

In Quebec (Canada), the roll-out of the vaccination started slowly in December 2020 due to limited vaccine supply. While the first and second doses were well-accepted among adults and vaccine uptake was above 90%, in late 2021 and 2022, vaccine acceptance decreased for children vaccination and receipt of a 3rd or a 4th dose. In the autumn of 2022, four focus groups were conducted with vaccine-hesitant parents of children aged 0-4 and adults who expressed little intention to receive a booster dose. The objective of this study was to gather participants' perspectives on vaccination in general, on the COVID-19 vaccination campaign and the information available, and to gain insights into the underlying reasons for their low intention of either having their child(ren) vaccinated, or receiving an additional dose of vaccine. A total of 35 participants took part in the focus groups. While participants expressed a certain level of trust and confidence in public health and government authorities regarding pandemic management and the vaccination campaign, they were also concerned that transparent information was lacking to support an informed decision on booster doses and children's vaccination. Many participants felt adequately protected against the infection during the focus groups, citing a lack of perceived benefits as the primary reason for refusing a booster dose. Parents who refused to administer the COVID-19 vaccine to their young children felt that the vaccine was not useful for children and were concerned about potential side effects. The majority reported that their opinions regarding other recommended vaccines had not changed since the beginning of the pandemic. While these results are reassuring, our findings highlight the importance of transparency in public health communications about vaccines to increase confidence and to develop strategies to address vaccine fatigue and complacency toward COVID-19 vaccines.