Trials / Completed
CompletedNCT07532967
Optimizing Weblinks Used in Digital Vaccination Invitations to Raise Trust and Booking Intention: Online Experiment 2
- Status
- Completed
- Phase
- N/A
- Study type
- Interventional
- Enrollment
- 1,203 (actual)
- Sponsor
- University of Essex · Academic / Other
- Sex
- All
- Age
- 18 Years
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
Summary
This study investigates how the design of web links in digital vaccination invitation emails affects recipient trust and their willingness to book an appointment. Researchers compare three different weblink formats: a control third-party link previously used by the NHS ("accurx"), and two experimental weblinks in which the original link is hidden: a shortened "bit.ly" link, and a text-embedded hyperlink. The study primarily tests whether the two experimental weblinks will be perceived as more trustworthy and increase booking intention compared to the control weblink. Furthermore, the study examines whether the experimental weblinks is perceived to be more fluent (easier to read) and improves participants' ability to correctly identify the organisation (e.g., the NHS or a US pharmacy) that sent the hypothetical email. To test these effects, investigators will gather data from 600 participants from the United Kingdom and 600 from the United States. They will be randomly assigned to view one of the three hypothetical email versions. UK participants will see emails appearing to be from the NHS, while US participants will see emails from a fictitious pharmacy (Pharma-US). This research aims to provide evidence on how to design more effective and trustworthy digital health communications.
Detailed description
This randomised experimental study investigates how weblink design influences the perceived trustworthiness of digital health communications. As digital invitations (e.g., emails and SMS) have become standard for public health initiatives such as vaccination programs, the use of third-party or disfluent (hard-to-read) web links may inadvertently undermine trust. Study Protocol and Intervention Participants will be randomly allocated to one of three experimental conditions. In all conditions, participants will read a hypothetical email invitation for a COVID-19 booster vaccine. The content of the emails remains identical except for the format of the booking weblink included in the email: Control Condition: Features the "accurx" web link (accurx.thirdparty.nhs.uk/r/aafwaczmd5) based on a third-party format used in official invitations from the UK's NHS. Experimental Condition 1: (Concealed in shortened URL) features a shortened version of the link using a bit.ly domain. Experimental Condition 2: (Concealed, text-embedded) shows the link presented as a descriptive hyperlink. To ensure relevance to the target populations, participants will see a version of the hypothetical email tailored to their country of residence: UK participants will see invitations sent from the NHS, while US participants will see invitations from a fictitious pharmacy (Pharma-US). Unlike the UK, COVID-19 vaccination in the US was predominantly organised by local pharmacies. Primary Hypotheses The study was designed to test six primary hypotheses: 1. The email containing the two experimental weblinks will be rated as significantly more trustworthy than the control "accurx" weblink. 2. Participants will report being more likely to use the link to book a vaccine appointment based on the experimental weblinks than the control "accurx" web link. 3. Participants will find the two experimental weblinks more fluent (easier to read) than the "accurx" control link. 4. Participants would be more likely to correctly identify the organisation that hosts the link based on the two experimental weblinks than based on the "accurx" control web link. 5. Trustworthiness, booking intention, host identification accuracy, and fluency would be positively correlated with each other. 6. The effect of the link will be mediated by the identification of the host organisation and the fluency of the link. Measurement Following the presentation of the hypothetical email, participants will rate the email on three 5-point Likert scales: trustworthiness (1: Very suspicious to 5: Very trustworthy), fluency (1: Very difficult to 5: Very easy), and booking intention (1: Very unlikely to 5: Very likely). Host identification will be assessed via a multiple-choice question with four options: the NHS, Pharma-US, Accurx, or 'Not sure'. The investigators will aim to gather data from 600 participants from the UK and 600 from the US. They will be invited to complete the study via an online platform. Participants who complete the study too fast or failed the attention check will be excluded. This study will be conducted as part of a larger research project exploring the broader relationship between the trustworthiness of digital messages and national vaccination rates. The study hypotheses, design, measures and analyses were preregistered before the start of data collection on a different platform (AsPredicted). This time stamped preregistration protocol is linked as a document in this registration.
Conditions
Interventions
| Type | Name | Description |
|---|---|---|
| BEHAVIORAL | Improved trust and engagement | The intervention involved presenting a hypothetical invitation to a COVID-19 booster vaccination via email. Participants were randomly allocated to view one of three versions of the invitation to evaluate how the specific design of the embedded weblink influences recipient trust and booking behaviour. To ensure local relevance, the email stimulus was adapted based on the participant's country of residence: participants in the United Kingdom saw invitations that appeared to be from the NHS, while those in the United States saw invitations that appeared to be from a fictitious pharmacy, Pharma-US. Following the intervention, participants evaluated the email's trustworthiness, the link's fluency, and their own intention to book a vaccine appointment. |
Timeline
- Start date
- 2022-01-13
- Primary completion
- 2022-01-23
- Completion
- 2022-01-23
- First posted
- 2026-04-16
- Last updated
- 2026-04-16
Locations
1 site across 1 country: United Kingdom
Source: ClinicalTrials.gov record NCT07532967. Inclusion in this directory is not an endorsement.