Keyword search (4,163 papers available)

"hesitancy" Keyword-tagged Publications:

Title Authors PubMed ID
1 Addressing vaccine hesitancy: A systematic review comparing the efficacy of motivational versus educational interventions on vaccination uptake Labbé S; Bacon SL; Wu N; Ribeiro PAB; Boucher VG; Stojanovic J; Voisard B; Deslauriers F; Tremblay N; Hébert-Auger L; Lavoie KL; 40167044
HKAP
2 A Systematic Review on Vaccine Hesitancy in Black Communities in Canada: Critical Issues and Research Failures Cénat JM; Noorishad PG; Bakombo SM; Onesi O; Mesbahi A; Darius WP; Caulley L; Yaya S; Chomienne MH; Etowa J; Venkatesh V; Dalexis RD; Pongou R; Labelle PR; 36423032
PSYCHOLOGY
3 Ending the Pandemic: How Behavioural Science Can Help Optimize Global COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake Vallis M; Bacon S; Corace K; Joyal-Desmarais K; Sheinfeld Gorin S; Paduano S; Presseau J; Rash J; Mengistu Yohannes A; Lavoie K; 35062668
HKAP
4 Vaccine hesitancy: evidence from an adverse events following immunization database, and the role of cognitive biases Azarpanah H; Farhadloo M; Vahidov R; Pilote L; 34530804
JMSB
5 Vaccination-hesitancy and vaccination-inequality as challenges in Pakistan's COVID-19 response Perveen S; Akram M; Nasar A; Arshad-Ayaz A; Naseem A; 34217150
EDUCATION
6 Global Trends and Correlates of COVID-19 Vaccination Hesitancy: Findings from the iCARE Study Stojanovic J; Boucher VG; Gagne M; Gupta S; Joyal-Desmarais K; Paduano S; Aburub AS; Sheinfeld Gorin SN; Kassianos AP; Ribeiro PAB; Bacon SL; Lavoie KL; 34204379
HKAP

 

Title:Addressing vaccine hesitancy: A systematic review comparing the efficacy of motivational versus educational interventions on vaccination uptake
Authors:Labbé SBacon SLWu NRibeiro PABBoucher VGStojanovic JVoisard BDeslauriers FTremblay NHébert-Auger LLavoie KL
Link:https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40167044/
DOI:10.1093/tbm/ibae069
Publication:Translational behavioral medicine
Keywords:behavior change techniqueshealth behaviormeta-analysismotivational interviewingsystematic reviewvaccine hesitancy
PMID:40167044 Category: Date Added:2025-04-01
Dept Affiliation: HKAP
1 Department of Psychology, University of Quebec at Montreal (UQAM), CP 8888, Succursale Centre-Ville, Montreal, Quebec H3C 3P8, Canada.
2 Montreal Behavioural Medicine Centre, Centre Intégré Universitaire de santé et services sociaux du Nord-de-l'Ile-de-Montréal (CIUSSS-NIM), Montreal H4J 1C5, Canada.
3 Department of Health, Kinesiology & Applied Physiology, Concordia University, Montreal H3G 1M8, Canada.

Description:

Traditional approaches to increase vaccination rely upon educating patients about vaccines. However, research shows that "knowing" vaccines are important is often insufficient: patients need to believe that getting vaccinated is important. Evidence-based motivational approaches, such as motivational interviewing/communication (MI/MC), have become increasingly popular for promoting good health behaviors, including vaccination. The objective of this review was to compare the efficacy of educational and MI/MC interventions on vaccination rates relative to each other and to usual/standard care. Pubmed, PsycINFO, and Cochrane trials databases were searched to identify articles that assessed vaccination rates post-patient education or MI/MC vaccine counseling in the context of adult or child vaccination (PROSPERO: CRD42019140255). Following the screening, 118 studies were included (108 educational and 10 MI/MC). The pooled effect sizes for vaccination rates corresponded to 52% for educational interventions (95% CI: 0.48-0.56) and 45% for MI/MC interventions (95% CI: 0.29-0.62) (P = .417). Fifty-nine randomized controlled studies (55 educational and 4 MI/MC) showed that, compared with usual/standard of care, exposure to education and MI/MC was associated with a 10% (RR =1.10; 95% CI =1.03-1.16, P = .002) and 7% (RR =1.07; 95% CI =0.78-1.45, P = .691) increased likelihood of getting vaccinated, respectively. Results suggest comparable efficacy of educational and MI/MC interventions on vaccination uptake and a small superiority of educational interventions compared with usual/standard of care. The overall poor quality of the studies, including lack of fidelity assessments of MI/MC studies, contributes to low confidence in the results and highlights the need for better quality intervention trials examining the efficacy of MI/MC for vaccine uptake.





BookR developed by Sriram Narayanan
for the Concordia University School of Health
Copyright © 2011-2026
Cookie settings
Concordia University