Electronically Delivered Nudges to Increase Influenza Vaccination Uptake in Older Adults With Diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".