Abstract:Background Vaccination is the most effective means of preventing the spread of infectious diseases. Despite the proven benefits of vaccination, vaccine hesitancy keeps many people from getting vaccinated. Methods and findings We conducted a large-scale cluster randomized controlled trial in Finland to test the effectiveness of centralized written reminders (distributed via mail) on influenza vaccination coverage. The study included the entire older adult population (aged 65 years and above) in 2 culturally and geographically distinct regions with historically low (31.8%, n = 7,398, mean age 75.5 years) and high (57.7%, n = 40,727, mean age 74.0 years) influenza vaccination coverage. The study population was randomized into 3 treatments: (i) no reminder (only in the region with low vaccination coverage); (ii) an individual-benefits reminder, informing recipients about the individual benefits of vaccination; and (iii) an individual- and social-benefits reminder, informing recipients about the additional social benefits of vaccination in the form of herd immunity. There was no control treatment group in the region with high vaccination coverage as general reminders had been sent in previous years. The primary endpoint was a record of influenza vaccination in the Finnish National Vaccination Register during a 5-month follow-up period (from October 18, 2018 to March 18, 2019). Vaccination coverage after the intervention in the region with historically low coverage was 41.8% in the individual-benefits treatment, 38.9% in the individual- and social-benefits treatment and 34.0% in the control treatment group. Vaccination coverage after the intervention in the region with historically high coverage was 59.0% in the individual-benefits treatment and 59.2% in the individual- and social-benefits treatment. The effect of receiving any type of reminder letter in comparison to control treatment group (no reminder) was 6.4 percentage points (95% CI: 3.6 to 9.1, p < 0.001). The effect of reminders was particularly large among individuals with no prior influenza vaccination (8.8 pp, 95% CI: 6.5 to 11.1, p < 0.001). There was a substantial positive effect (5.3 pp, 95% CI: 2.8 to 7.8, p < 0.001) among the most consistently unvaccinated individuals who had not received any type of vaccine during the 9 years prior to the study. There was no difference in influenza vaccination coverage between the individual-benefit reminder and the individual- and social-benefit reminder (region with low vaccination coverage: 2.9 pp, 95% CI: −0.4 to 6.1, p = 0.087, region with high vaccination coverage: 0.2 pp, 95% CI: −1.0 to 1.3, p = 0.724). Study limitations included potential contamination between the treatments due to information spillovers and the lack of control treatment group in the region with high vaccination coverage. Conclusions In this study, we found that sending reminders was an effective and scalable intervention strategy to increase vaccination coverage in an older adult population with low vaccination coverage. Communicating the social benefits of vaccinations, in addition to individual benefits, did not enhance vaccination coverage. The effectiveness of letter reminders about the benefits of vaccination to improve influenza vaccination coverage may depend on the prior vaccination history of the population. Trial registration AEA RCT registry AEARCTR-0003520 and ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03748160

Inattention or reluctance? Parental responses to vaccination reminder letters

Reminder design and childhood vaccination coverage

Written reminders increase vaccine coverage in Danish children - evaluation of a nationwide intervention using The Danish Vaccination Register, 2014 to 2015

Information nudges for influenza vaccination: Evidence from a large-scale cluster-randomized controlled trial in Finland

Electronic Nudges to Increase Influenza Vaccination in Patients With Chronic Diseases: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Determinants of vaccine refusal, delay and reluctance in parents of 2-year-old children in Canada: Findings from the 2017 Childhood National Immunization Coverage Survey (cNICS)

Can uptake of childhood influenza immunisation through schools and GP practices be increased through behaviourally-informed invitation letters and reminders: two pragmatic randomized controlled trials

Impact of a patient reminder letter from their general practitioners on influenza vaccination: A quasi-experimental study in Paris, France

Vaccination status and causes of non-adherence to vaccination schedule in young children

Incomplete Vaccination among Children with Special Health Care Needs in Zhejiang, China: Analysis of Retrospective Data

Vaccination nudges: A study of pre-booked COVID-19 vaccinations in Sweden

Flu nudges ... and other research

Patient reminder and recall interventions to improve immunization rates.

Lessons from a longitudinal community-based investigation of adherence to guidelines and intent to vaccinate during the COVID-19 pandemic

Clinical Outcomes With Electronic Nudges to Increase Influenza Vaccination

Parental intention, attitudes, beliefs, trust and deliberation towards childhood vaccination in the Netherlands in 2022: Indications of change compared to 2013

Factors Associated with Parental Refusal of Routine Vaccination in the Czech Republic

The Delicate Situation of Childhood Vaccination: On the Dispreferredness of Soliciting Parents' Intent to Vaccinate

Not taking "no" for an answer: the interactional organization of accepting and refusing childhood vaccination in the Netherlands

Randomised controlled trial of a theory-based intervention to prompt front-line staff to take up the seasonal influenza vaccine

Adolescent and parental decision-making for the MenACWY vaccination: influential predictors and parental-adolescent differences among households in the Netherlands