Influenza VaccinesNCT00296270
Memory for Flu Facts and Myths and Effects on Vaccine Intentions
A study testing Memory for truth in people with Influenza Vaccines, run by University of Michigan at 2 sites in 2 countries.
Trial summary
Objectives: To determine whether people systematically misremember the "myths" (false information) as true, and to assess effects on perceptions of risk and behavioral intentions. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 26 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Influenza Vaccines
- What is being tested?
- Memory for truth
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- How many people
- 175 participants
- Where
- 2 sitesin 2 countries
- Study dates
- Mar 2005to Jun 2005
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 26 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult
Who may be able to join
- Must be able to read and write fluent English
Who cannot join
- -
Trial locations and contacts
2 sites in 2 countries.
2 sites in 2 countries
Canada1 site
Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto
Toronto, Ontario, M5S 3E6
About this study
Official title: "Myths and Facts" About the Flu: Health Education Campaigns Can Reduce Vaccination Intentions
Objectives: To determine whether people systematically misremember the "myths" (false information) as true, and to assess effects on perceptions of risk and behavioral intentions.
Read the detailed description
Public information campaigns often warn people about false and unreliable medical claims by juxtaposing "myths" and "facts." The effectiveness of such communications has rarely been assessed. We assessed whether people systematically misremember the "myths" (false information) as true, and to assess effects on perceptions of risk and behavioral intentions.
In an experimental study, participants read either a published CDC flyer on "Facts and Myths" about the flu vaccine, or a "Facts Only" version; a separate control group read no flyer. Participants completed the outcome measures either immediately or after 30 minutes.
Primary measures were memory for information about the flu presented in the flyer, ratings of perceived risks associated with the flu, and personal intentions to get vaccinated in the upcoming season.
After a delay of 30 minutes, participants who read the "Facts and Myths" flyer systematically misremembered myths as facts. Both versions of the flyer had the immediate effect of increasing intentions to get a flu vaccine, compared to the control group. After 30 minutes, however, participants who read the "Facts and Myths" flyer reported lower intentions to get vaccinated, compared to those who read the same flyer with no delay, and compared to all participants who read the "Facts Only" flyer.
In sum, people show a bias to think that incompletely remembered information is true, turning "myths" into "facts." Hence public information campaigns should emphasize information that is true. Repeating false information, even as a warning, can create the unintended consequence of belief in the information.
- Conditions
- Influenza Vaccines
- Being tested
- Memory for truth
- Medical subject headings
- Influenza, Human
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Memory for truthBehavioural
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Memory for truth of information in a flyer.
Secondary outcomes (1)
Intention to get flu vaccine in upcoming season.
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted24 Feb 2006 (estimated)
- Study startMar 2005
- Study completionJun 2005
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Influenza VaccinesStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University of MichiganThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Early clinical test
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Factorial
- Masking
- Double blind
- Enrolment
- 175 participants
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Michigan
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Investigators
- Ian Skurnik, PhD, Principal investigator, Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00296270
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- RIR13914
- Status last verified
- Feb 2006
- First submitted
- 23 Feb 2006
- Last updated
- 24 Feb 2006
- Results posted
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 24 Feb 2006. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- "Myths and Facts" About the Flu: Health Education Campaigns Can Reduce Vaccination Intentions
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00296270
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- RIR13914
- Conditions
- Influenza Vaccines
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 175 participants
- Lead sponsor
- University of MichiganUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Mar 2005
- Study completion
- Jun 2005
- First posted
- 24 Feb 2006 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Objectives: To determine whether people systematically misremember the "myths" (false information) as true, and to assess effects on perceptions of risk and behavioral intentions.
Detailed description
Public information campaigns often warn people about false and unreliable medical claims by juxtaposing "myths" and "facts." The effectiveness of such communications has rarely been assessed. We assessed whether people systematically misremember the "myths" (false information) as true, and to assess effects on perceptions of risk and behavioral intentions.
In an experimental study, participants read either a published CDC flyer on "Facts and Myths" about the flu vaccine, or a "Facts Only" version; a separate control group read no flyer. Participants completed the outcome measures either immediately or after 30 minutes.
Primary measures were memory for information about the flu presented in the flyer, ratings of perceived risks associated with the flu, and personal intentions to get vaccinated in the upcoming season.
After a delay of 30 minutes, participants who read the "Facts and Myths" flyer systematically misremembered myths as facts. Both versions of the flyer had the immediate effect of increasing intentions to get a flu vaccine, compared to the control group. After 30 minutes, however, participants who read the "Facts and Myths" flyer reported lower intentions to get vaccinated, compared to those who read the same flyer with no delay, and compared to all participants who read the "Facts Only" flyer.
In sum, people show a bias to think that incompletely remembered information is true, turning "myths" into "facts." Hence public information campaigns should emphasize information that is true. Repeating false information, even as a warning, can create the unintended consequence of belief in the information.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Early clinical test
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Factorial
- Masking
- Double blind
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 26 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Must be able to read and write fluent English
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- -
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Memory for truth | Behavioural | – |
Primary outcome
Memory for truth of information in a flyer.
1 secondary outcome
Intention to get flu vaccine in upcoming season.
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 24 Feb 2006.
Related trials for Influenza Vaccines
Active, not recruitingObservational study
SCIVAX: Biomarkers of Immune Dysfunction and Vaccine Responsiveness in Chronic SCI
Spinal Cord Injuries, Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury
Active, not recruiting
Conversational AI for Adult Flu Vaccination Decisions
Influenza, Human, Vaccine Hesitancy
Not yet recruitingPhase 4
Preoperative Pneumococcal and Influenza Vaccination to Prevent Postoperative Pulmonary Infection in Patients Undergoing Lung Resection for Pulmonary Nodules or Lung Cancer
Pneumococcal Polysaccharide Vaccine, Influenza Vaccines
Active, not recruitingPhase 4
A Deep Longitudinal Analysis of Next Generation Influenza Vaccines in Older Adults
Aging, Influenza Vaccine
Not yet recruitingPhase 2
Vaccination Response Modulation With a Targeted Rapamycin Protocol Study
Vaccine Immune Response, Haemodialysis Patients
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Ian Skurnik, PhD principal investigator
Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto
2 sites in 2 countries: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Memory for truth in people with Influenza Vaccines, run by University of Michigan at 2 sites in 2 countries.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 24 Feb 2006. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 2 sites in United States, Canada. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Memory for truth of information in a flyer.. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 24 Feb 2006; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 7 Nov 2026.