MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4404841238 · doi:10.2196/63938

Effectiveness of Text Messaging Nudging to Increase Coverage of Influenza Vaccination Among Older Adults in Norway (InfluSMS Study): Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

2024· article· en· W4404841238 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bo T. Hansen, Ole Klungsøyr, Angela S. Labberton, Lauri Sääksvuori, Kjersti Margrethe Rydland, Liz Ertzeid Ødeskaug, Torbjørn Wisløff, Hinta Meijerink

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfluenza Virus Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNorwegianMedicineImmigrationVaccinationPopulationRandomized controlled trialPsychological interventionIntervention (counseling)DemographyGerontologyEnvironmental healthNursingGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The coverage of influenza vaccination among older adults in Norway is insufficient, especially in some immigrant groups. To improve public health, there is a need for an intervention that can increase influenza vaccination coverage. Further, interventions tailored to reduce potential barriers among immigrants can reduce health inequities. OBJECTIVE: InfluSMS aims to determine if SMS nudging increases vaccination coverage among those aged 65 years or older (1) in Norway's general population; (2) among immigrants born in Poland; and (3) among immigrants born in Ukraine; and evaluate the impact of SMS nudging in Norwegian versus in the official language of the native country of immigrants born in Poland or Ukraine. METHODS: InfluSMS is a pragmatic randomized controlled trial conducted among people aged 65 years or older residing in Norway. Influenza vaccination coverage is the main outcome, measured in control and intervention arms for each of the 3 populations listed earlier. In all 3 populations, the control arm is standard care, that is, no individual reminder for influenza vaccination. All populations have an intervention arm that will receive an SMS nudge in the Norwegian language. In addition, the Polish and Ukrainian immigrant populations include a second intervention arm that will receive an SMS nudge in Polish or Ukrainian, respectively. In the general population, at least 23,485 individuals will be randomized to the SMS intervention arm while the rest of the population constitutes the control arm. In each of the 2 immigrant populations, we will randomize all eligible individuals 1:1:1 into the 3 arms. The intervention will take place at the start of the 2025-2026 influenza season. All eligible individuals will be passively followed up through the National Immunisation Registry, SYSVAK, from which individual influenza vaccination status 3 months after the SMS nudge will be collected. Coverage rates between arms within each population and effect sizes between the populations will be compared. The cost-effectiveness of SMS nudging will also be assessed. RESULTS: The inclusion of participants will start in the third quarter of 2025, and the registry data will be available in the first quarter of 2026. Coverage rates of each strategy and coverage differences between strategies will be presented. CONCLUSIONS: SMS nudging is a scalable, inexpensive, and nonintrusive intervention that could be integrated into the national influenza vaccination program if the trial shows it effectively increases influenza vaccination coverage among older adults. Further, the trial will establish whether language is a barrier to influenza vaccination uptake among recent immigrant groups that have low influenza vaccination coverage, and to what extent this potential barrier can be diminished by SMS nudging in the official language of their native country. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06486766; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06486766. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/63938.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.033
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.228

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0330.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.007
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0070.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0680.009

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.

Opus teacher head0.099
GPT teacher head0.550
Teacher spread0.452 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicInfluenza Virus Research Studies→French-language works237,207→