University of Surrey

Test tubes in the lab Research in the ATI Dance Research

Communicating to increase public uptake of pandemic flu vaccination in the UK: which messages work?

Mowbray, F, Marcu, AM, Godinho, CA, Michie, S and Yardley, L (2016) Communicating to increase public uptake of pandemic flu vaccination in the UK: which messages work? Vaccine, 34 (28). pp. 3268-3274.

[img] Text
Mowbray et al _Communicating to increase public uptake of pandemic flu vaccination in the UK_manuscript revised and accepted for publication in Vaccine.pdf - Accepted version Manuscript
Restricted to Repository staff only until 8 May 2017.
Available under License : See the attached licence file.

Download (491kB)
[img]
Preview
Text (licence)
SRI_deposit_agreement.pdf
Available under License : See the attached licence file.

Download (33kB) | Preview

Abstract

Background: Vaccination is considered the most effective preventive measure against influenza transmission, yet vaccination rates during the 2009/10 influenza A/H1N1 pandemic were low across the world, with the majority of people declining to receive the vaccine. Despite extensive research on the predictors of uptake of influenza vaccination, little research has focused on testing the effectiveness of evidence and theory-based messages. Aims: To examine the persuasiveness of messages promoting vaccination and antiviral use either as health-enhancing or as risk-reducing, as well as messages which conveyed evidence-based information about the costs and benefits of vaccination, or which applied anticipated regret as a motivator for vaccine uptake. Method: We conducted 11 focus groups with forty-one members of the general population in England including young and older adults, those with lower education, parents, and those with elevated health risk. The data were analysed using thematic analysis. Results: The factual, evidence-based messages were well received with participants finding them the most convincing and useful, particularly where they gave cost-benefit comparisons. Health-enhancing messages were received with scepticism and concern that the messages were not honest about the potential lack of safety of vaccination. In contrast, risk-reduction messages were perceived as being more balanced and credible. Messages aiming to elicit feelings of anticipated regret for not getting vaccinated were generally perceived as patronising and unprofessional. Conclusions: Vaccination messages should be kept brief, but convey balanced, evidence-based information, and be transparent in their communication of potential side-effects. The general public seem to prefer messages that are factual and emphasise the costs and benefits of vaccination, particularly with regards to vaccine safety.

Item Type: Article
Subjects : subj_Health_Care
Divisions : Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences > School of Health Sciences
Authors :
AuthorsEmailORCID
Mowbray, FUNSPECIFIEDUNSPECIFIED
Marcu, AMUNSPECIFIEDUNSPECIFIED
Godinho, CAUNSPECIFIEDUNSPECIFIED
Michie, SUNSPECIFIEDUNSPECIFIED
Yardley, LUNSPECIFIEDUNSPECIFIED
Date : 8 May 2016
Identification Number : 10.1016/j.vaccine.2016.05.006
Copyright Disclaimer : © 2016. This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
Uncontrolled Keywords : influenza; pandemic; risk communication; vaccination
Related URLs :
Depositing User : Symplectic Elements
Date Deposited : 04 May 2016 11:31
Last Modified : 05 Jul 2016 14:48
URI: http://epubs.surrey.ac.uk/id/eprint/810621

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year


Information about this web site

© The University of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey, GU2 7XH, United Kingdom.
+44 (0)1483 300800