Global search

Find data and evidence

Type at least 2 characters. Use arrow keys to review and Enter to open.

Peer reviewedOpen accessInfluenza

Does correcting myths about the flu vaccine work? An experimental evaluation of the effects of corrective information

Vaccine·

Brendan Nyhan, Jason Reifler

DOI
10.1016/j.vaccine.2014.11.017
PMID
25499651
PMCID
OpenAlex
W2016277644
Study type
Journal article
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Article type
journal-article
Integrity
current

Why this research matters now

The findings indicate that myth-correction approaches to influenza vaccine promotion may have unintended effects among subgroups most concerned about side effects, and the authors suggest this may not be an effective strategy for increasing immunization.

01

Structured evidence summary

Research question

The study examines whether correcting the myth that the seasonal influenza vaccine can cause influenza affects belief in the myth, safety concerns, and future vaccination intent.

Study design

A nationally representative survey experiment conducted in the United States that compared the effects of CDC-adapted corrective information about influenza vaccination.

Population and setting

A nationally representative U.S. survey sample of the general public, with respondents segmented by baseline level of concern about vaccine side effects.

Main findings

Approximately 43% of respondents believed the flu vaccine can give you the flu. Corrective information significantly reduced belief in this myth and reduced safety concerns overall. Among respondents with high concern about vaccine side effects, the correction significantly reduced intent to vaccinate, an effect not observed among those with low concern.

Public-health relevance

The findings indicate that myth-correction approaches to influenza vaccine promotion may have unintended effects among subgroups most concerned about side effects, and the authors suggest this may not be an effective strategy for increasing immunization.

Important limitations

This summary is limited to the supplied single-article abstract and bibliographic metadata; explicit study limitations (e.g., generalizability, behavioral vs. stated intent outcomes, durability of effects) are not reported in the abstract and require review of the original paper.

GIDS interpretation

The article is indexed under influenza, vaccination, and vaccine safety topics, indicating relevance to discoverability of evidence on communication strategies for vaccine confidence; no connection to a live surveillance signal is made.

02

Related GIDS surveillance

Literature context does not validate, explain, or change a surveillance signal. Exact and contextual relationships are shown separately.

03

Evidence relationships

This article has 13 auditable classifier relationships to diseases, places, topics, and study design.

about diseaseaddresses topicaddresses topicaddresses topicaddresses topicevaluates interventionevaluates interventionhas pathogen typestudied instudied population settingstudies pathogenstudies populationuses study design