Abstract
Background A nudge is any procedure that modifies and/or influences the architecture of a choice, without using persuasion or financial incentives. It is commonly referred to as a “psychological nudge”. Nudges are effective in promoting public health issues such as HPV vaccination. Several systematic reviews of the literature place nudges among the most promising interventions for increasing vaccination coverage.
Objective The objective of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness and acceptability of a nudge towards HPV vaccination based on the proposal of a consultation appointment to the parents of boys aged 11 to 14 years in the patient base of two general practitioners. The secondary objective is to evaluate the role of the feeling of control in this acceptability.
Methods Participants were divided into two parallel experimental arms: a nudge group and a non-nudge group. The procedure used was a simple randomization of the parents of boys aged 11-14 years into two groups in the general practitioner’s practice. The study was conducted in two phases and took the form of a proposed appointment at the private practice of the participants in the nudged group. A questionnaire was administered to the participants in both groups one month after these appointments, asking them about their vaccination status regarding HPV vaccination, their acceptability of the nudge and their feeling of control in this procedure.
Results The analysis was carried out on 32 participants in each of the two groups. The nudge was significantly effective in terms of vaccination coverage. Similar acceptability was found in both groups. The absence of a feeling of control was noted.
Conclusion This study shows that the prevalence of a vaccination can be significantly modified by a nudge. This study did not show a significant difference in the acceptability of the nudge in the two groups. However, the acceptability of the nudge is significant in both groups. The literature shows good external consistency across different populations in France. This could mean that the French population is predominantly pro-nudge. Thus, a nudge deemed acceptable by the participants is not necessarily ethical, and may insidiously implant an idea. The ethical approach to nudges before their implementation is therefore essential.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Trial
NCT03768596
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
As an interventional study in the human and social sciences applied to the field of health, the study was classified outside the scope of the Jardé law by the Comité de protection des Personnes (CPP) of Saint Etienne (ID RCB number: 2021-A01140-41 10.05.2021). The project was then submitted to the Collège National des Généralistes Enseignants (CNGE) as well as to the Comité éthique pour les Recherches Non Interventionnelles (CERNI) of the Université Côte d'Azur (Number AVIS n° 2022-018) which issued a favorable opinion. This work was the subject of a declaration of compliance with the reference methodology 004 to the CNIL n°2221990v0.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
No differences
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors