Electronically Delivered Nudges to Increase Influenza Vaccination Uptake in Older Adults With Diabetes
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Importance: Influenza vaccination is associated with a reduced risk of mortality in patients with diabetes, but vaccination rates remain suboptimal. Objective: To assess the effect of electronic nudges on influenza vaccination uptake according to diabetes status. Design, Setting, and Participants: The NUDGE-FLU (Nationwide Utilization of Danish Government Electronic Letter System for Increasing Influenza Vaccine Uptake) trial was a nationwide clinical trial of Danish citizens 65 years or older that randomized participants at the household level to usual care or 9 different electronic nudge letters during the 2022 to 2023 influenza season. End of follow-up was January 1, 2023. This secondary analysis of the NUDGE-FLU trial was performed from May to July 2023. Intervention: Nine different electronic nudge letters designed to boost influenza vaccination were sent in September to October 2022. Effect modification by diabetes status was assessed in a pooled analysis of all intervention arms vs usual care and for individual letters. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was receipt of a seasonal influenza vaccine. Results: The trial included 964 870 participants (51.5% female; mean [SD] age, 73.8 [6.3] years); 123 974 had diabetes. During follow-up, 83.5% with diabetes vs 80.2% without diabetes received a vaccine (P < .001). In the pooled analysis, nudges improved vaccination uptake in participants without diabetes (80.4% vs 80.0%; difference, 0.37 percentage points; 99.55% CI, 0.08 to 0.66), whereas there was no evidence of effect in those with diabetes (83.4% vs 83.6%; difference, -0.19 percentage points; 99.55% CI, -0.89 to 0.51) (P = .02 for interaction). In the main results of NUDGE-FLU, 2 of the 9 behaviorally designed letters (cardiovascular benefits letter and a repeated letter) significantly increased uptake of influenza vaccination vs usual care; these benefits similarly appeared attenuated in participants with diabetes (cardiovascular gain letter: 83.7% vs 83.6%; difference, 0.04 percentage points; 99.55% CI, -1.52 to 1.60; repeated letter: 83.5% vs 83.6%; difference, -0.15 percentage points; 99.55% CI, -1.71 to 1.41) vs those without diabetes (cardiovascular gain letter: 81.1% vs 80.0%; difference, 1.06 percentage points; 99.55% CI, 0.42 to 1.70; repeated letter: 80.9% vs 80.0%; difference, 0.87 percentage points; 99.55% CI, 0.22 to 1.52) (P = .07 for interaction). Conclusions and Relevance: In this exploratory subgroup analysis, electronic nudges improved influenza vaccination uptake in persons without diabetes, whereas there was no evidence of an effect in persons with diabetes. Trials are needed to investigate the effect of digital nudges specifically tailored to individuals with diabetes. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05542004.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».