Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40379315›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open2025

Communication-based interventions to increase COVID-19 vaccine willingness and uptake: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

Claire Iannizzi, Marike Andreas, Emma Bohndorf, Caroline Hirsch, Ana-Mihaela Zorger, Janine Brinkmann-Paulukat, Brigitte Bormann, Jessica Kaufman, Tina Lischetzki, Ina Monsef and 5 more

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

15 authors.

Claire IannizziInstitute of Public Health, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany claire.iannizzi@uk-koeln.de.ORCID 0000-0002-6130-5997
Marike AndreasEvidence-based Medicine Department I of Internal Medicine, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Emma BohndorfEvidence-based Medicine Department I of Internal Medicine, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Caroline HirschInstitute of Public Health, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Ana-Mihaela ZorgerInstitute of Public Health, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Janine Brinkmann-PaulukatDivision Infection Prevention NRW Centre for Health, Bochum, Germany.
Brigitte BormannDivision Health Data, Healthcare Structures, NRW Centre for Health, Bochum, Germany.
Jessica KaufmanMurdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Tina LischetzkiEvidence-based Medicine Department I of Internal Medicine, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Ina MonsefInstitute of Public Health, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Julia NeufeindRobert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany.
Nora Schmid-KüpkeRobert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany.
Sebastian TholeDivision Infection Prevention NRW Centre for Health, Bochum, Germany.
Karina WorbesInstitute of Public Health, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Nicole SkoetzInstitute of Public Health, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis systematic review investigates the effectiveness of different communication strategies to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake and willingness.

designSystematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs), following recommendations from the DATA SOURCES: We searched the following databases until 27 July 2022: Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science Core Collection and WHO COVID-19 Global literature. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR STUDY SELECTION: We included RCTs investigating, any population, communication-based interventions to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake and comparing these with no intervention (with or without placebo), another communication strategy or another type of intervention.

methodsScreening, data extraction and bias assessment, using the Cochrane ROB 1.0 tool, were conducted by two authors independently. We performed meta-analyses if studies were homogeneous using the Review Manager (RevMan 5) software, synthesised the remaining results narratively and assessed the certainty in the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.

resultsWe identified 49 studies reporting on the predefined four categories of communication interventions. Evidence from our meta-analyses shows that COVID-19 vaccine uptake may increase when education and information strategies are applied (risk ratio (RR) 1.23, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.28; high-certainty evidence) or social norms are communicated (RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.23 to 1.33; high-certainty evidence) compared with no intervention. The different communication strategies mostly have little to no impact on vaccine intention; however, there may be a slight increase in vaccine confidence when gain framing is applied compared with no intervention.

conclusionOverall, we found that education and information-based interventions or social norm-framing strategies are most effective compared with no intervention given. Our findings show that some of the investigated communication strategies might influence policy decision-making, and our results could be useful for future pandemics as well. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO (CRD42021296618).

Indexed as

CommunicationCOVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesPatient Acceptance of Health CareVaccinationVaccination HesitancyHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSARS-CoV-2COVID-19 VaccinesCOVID-19Infection controlMeta-AnalysisVaccination

Identifiers

PMID40379315
PMCPMC12086885

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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 Socratic graph.