Vaccination Intention Following Receipt of Vaccine Information Through Interactive Simulation vs Text among COVID-19 Vaccine-Hesitant Adults during the Omicron Wave in Germany

10Citations
Citations of this article
46Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Importance: Hesitancy toward COVID-19 vaccination is a major factor in stagnating uptake rates and in the risk of health care systems becoming overwhelmed. Objective: To compare an interactive risk ratio simulation (intervention) with a conventional text-based risk information format (control) and analyze change in participants' COVID-19 vaccination intention and benefit-to-harm assessment. Design, Setting, and Participants: Cross-sectional study conducted online with 1255 COVID-19 vaccine-hesitant adult residents of Germany in April and May 2022, surveyed using a probability-based internet panel maintained by respondi, a research and analytics firm. Participants were randomized to 1 of 2 presentations on the benefits and adverse events associated with vaccination. Exposure: Participants were randomized to a text-based description vs an interactive simulation presenting age-adjusted absolute risks of infection, hospitalization, ICU admission, and death after exposure to coronavirus in vaccinated vs unvaccinated individuals relative to the possible adverse effects as well as additional (population-level) benefits of COVID-19 vaccination. Main Outcomes and Measures: Absolute change in respondents' COVID-19 vaccination intention category and benefit-to-harm assessment category. Results: Participants were 1255 COVID-19 vaccine-hesitant residents of Germany (660 women [52.6%]; mean [SD] age, 43.6 [13.5] years). A total of 651 participants received a text-based description, and 604 participants received an interactive simulation. Relative to the text-based format, the simulation was associated with greater likelihood of positive change in vaccination intentions (19.5% vs 15.3%, respectively; absolute difference, 4.2%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.45; 95% CI, 1.07-1.96; P =.01) and benefit-to-harm assessments (32.6% vs 18.0%; absolute difference, 14.6%; aOR, 2.14; 95% CI, 1.64-2.80; P

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Wegwarth, O., Mansmann, U., Zepp, F., Lühmann, D., Hertwig, R., & Scherer, M. (2023). Vaccination Intention Following Receipt of Vaccine Information Through Interactive Simulation vs Text among COVID-19 Vaccine-Hesitant Adults during the Omicron Wave in Germany. JAMA Network Open, 6(2), E2256208. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.56208

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free