Emails Promoting COVID-19 Vaccination Among Healthcare Workers

NCT ID: NCT04728594

Last Updated: 2021-07-26

Basic Information

• Recruitment Status: COMPLETED
• Clinical Phase: NA
• Total Enrollment: 9566 participants
• Study Classification: INTERVENTIONAL
• Study Start Date: 2021-01-15
• Study Completion Date: 2021-01-20

Brief Summary

In this evaluation, two versions of emails will be sent to Geisinger employees who have not been vaccinated against COVID-19. A delayed-contact control group will be emailed after a delay of at least two days. The researchers hypothesize that either of the emails - which use content informed by behavioral nudge theory - will lead to more COVID-19 vaccinations than the delayed-contact control group.

Detailed Description

The researchers aim to evaluate the effectiveness of email reminders in promoting COVID-19 vaccinations among Geisinger employees. The project will compare two emails, which will vary in the subject line and email content. Both emails will test different approaches that draw from principles in behavioral science: social proof, reframing, and scarcity. Employees receiving these emails will be compared with employees in a delayed-contact group, who will not receive emails. Employees in the control group will later receive one of the emails.The responses to the emails will help determine the communications later sent to the control group.

All emails will ask recipients if they want to receive a COVID-19 vaccination. If they click on a hyperlink indicating yes, they will be forwarded to an online registration and scheduling homepage. If they click on a hyperlink indicating no, they will be forwarded to an online questionnaire surveying people about their main reason for declining the vaccine at this time. The questionnaire will automatically present information intended to assuage the specific concern that people endorse, followed by a hyperlink to the scheduling site.

The data will be analyzed with logistic regression models with the control group as the reference group, to compare the two email conditions versus the control group. This set of analyses will only be conducted for scheduling a vaccination appointment as opposed to email engagement outcomes (e.g., number of emails opened), which will not be applicable for the control group. A second set of logistic regression models predicting scheduling a vaccination appointment and email engagement will also be run, comparing the two email conditions against each other. The data will be examined two days later (to help decide which email to send to the delayed-control group) and four days later (when the policy for employee vaccination will change, making the content of the email irrelevant).

Update: The researchers looked at 3 days of data - as the emails to the delayed contact group were only sent at that time - and 4 days of data when the policy for employee vaccinations changed.

Conditions

Vaccination Refusal; Communication

Study Design

• Allocation Method: RANDOMIZED
• Intervention Model: PARALLEL
• Primary Study Purpose: PREVENTION
• Blinding Strategy: DOUBLE

Study Groups

Delayed Contact

This group will not receive an email for at least two days.

Group Type: NO_INTERVENTION

No interventions assigned to this group

Social Proof

This group will receive an email that points out that vaccine availability for employees will soon be limited. It also emphasizes how many fellow health care workers have been vaccinated. Seeing the behaviors of other people might encourage recipients to copy that behavior.

Group Type: EXPERIMENTAL

Social Proof

Intervention Type: BEHAVIORAL

Email

Scarcity Message

Intervention Type: BEHAVIORAL

Email

Reframing Side Effects and Adverse Reactions

This group will receive an email that points out that vaccine availability for employees will soon be limited. It also addresses concerns about the side effects and adverse reactions of the vaccine. Due to potentially overblown concerns about the vaccine caused by the salience of side effects in the (social) media, the email attempts to reframe the risks by explicitly noting the small possibility of being affected by serious side effects and by contrasting that to the more severe effects of COVID-19. As a result of this reframing, recipients might recalibrate their perception of risks and benefits and opt for vaccination.

Group Type: EXPERIMENTAL

Reframing

Intervention Type: BEHAVIORAL

Email

Scarcity Message

Intervention Type: BEHAVIORAL

Email

Interventions

Social Proof

Email

Intervention Type: BEHAVIORAL

Reframing

Email

Intervention Type: BEHAVIORAL

Scarcity Message

Email

Intervention Type: BEHAVIORAL

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

• Employees at Geisinger Health System who have not gotten a COVID-19 vaccination

Exclusion Criteria

• None

• Eligible Sex: ALL
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: Yes

Sponsors

Geisinger Clinic

OTHER

Sponsor Role: lead

Responsible Party

Michelle N. Meyer

Faculty Co-Director, Behavioral Insights Team

Responsibility Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

Michelle M Meyer, PhD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Geisinger Clinic

Locations

Geisinger

Danville, Pennsylvania, United States

Countries

United States

References

Santos HC, Goren A, Chabris CF, Meyer MN. Effect of Targeted Behavioral Science Messages on COVID-19 Vaccination Registration Among Employees of a Large Health System: A Randomized Trial. JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Jul 1;4(7):e2118702. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.18702.

Reference Type: DERIVED

PMID: 34319359 (View on PubMed)

Provided Documents

Document Type: Study Protocol and Statistical Analysis Plan

View Document

Other Identifiers

2021-0128

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id