Bridging Gaps: Evaluating Strategies to Improve Vaccine Uptake and Strengthen Clinical and Translational Research Recruitment Among U.S. Adult Populations

dc.contributor.authorHensley, Amanda Andressen
dc.contributor.committeechairHosig, Kathryn Wrighten
dc.contributor.committeememberHolz, Adrienneen
dc.contributor.committeememberParker, Sarahen
dc.contributor.committeememberGerdes, Julie Marieen
dc.contributor.departmentGraduate Schoolen
dc.date.accessioned2026-06-17T08:01:16Zen
dc.date.available2026-06-17T08:01:16Zen
dc.date.issued2026-06-16en
dc.description.abstractBackground and Rationale: Despite decades of federal policy mandates and extensive public health infrastructure investment, critical gaps have persisted in the effectiveness and equity of two core activities in U.S. health research: vaccine promotion and research recruitment. Effective vaccination strategies and representative clinical and translational research enrollment have been essential to population health, yet both have continued to fail disproportionately in reaching the populations with the greatest need. Enacted in 2010, the Affordable Care Act (ACA) eliminated financial barriers to recommended vaccines, yet adult vaccination rates have remained well below Healthy People 2030 goals across populations. Simultaneously, more than 30 years after the NIH Revitalization Act mandated inclusion of underrepresented populations in federally funded research, racial and ethnic minority groups, low-income individuals, rural residents, persons with disabilities, and other structurally marginalized communities have remained systematically underrepresented in clinical and translational research samples. These twin failures have shared a common, underexamined cause: researchers have continued to design strategies for populations of convenience rather than populations of need, generating an evidence base that has reflected and reinforced existing health disparities rather than addressing them. Objectives: This dissertation pursued two parallel systematic synthesis objectives and one framework development objective. Project 1 aimed to synthesize the post-ACA peer-reviewed literature (2010-2025) on strategies designed to increase vaccine intention and improve vaccine uptake among U.S. adult populations, and to characterize the types, settings, populations served, and effectiveness of those strategies using a multiple linear regression. Project 2 aimed to synthesize and evaluate the characteristics and effectiveness of recruitment strategies used in NIH-funded clinical and translational research to engage underrepresented U.S. adult populations (1993-2025), focusing on peer-reviewed studies that evaluated strategies through comparative or controlled designs. Project 3 built upon the findings of Project 2 to develop ReFrame, a theory-informed, multi-domain framework for planning, implementing, evaluating, and reporting research recruitment strategies with an explicit health equity orientation. Methods: Both systematic reviews followed PRISMA 2020 guidelines and were registered on the Open Science Framework (Project 1: OSF 10.17605/OSF.IO/SM7YD; Project 2: OSF 10.17605/OSF.IO/BYS5G). Comprehensive multi-database searches were conducted across PubMed, Web of Science, Ovid/MEDLINE, and EBSCOhost, including CINAHL and PsycInfo, supplemented by Google Scholar gap checks and forward/backward citation chasing, with final searches completed in December 2025. Dual independent reviewers conducted screening and data extraction at each stage, with a third reviewer resolving conflicts. Study quality was assessed using the Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP) Quality Assessment Tool, and overall evidence certainty was evaluated using the GRADE framework. For Project 1, strategies were categorized according to the WHO Behavioral and Social Drivers of Vaccination (BeSD) Model, and a multiple linear regression was conducted using vaccine uptake rate as the dependent variable across 79 eligible studies. For Project 2, a multiple linear regression was conducted using enrollment rate as the dependent variable across 43 eligible studies (118 strategy arms). ReFrame was developed through the convergence of systematic review findings with established theoretical models from health behavior science, implementation science, and community-based participatory research (CBPR) principles. Results: Project 1 (Vaccine SRMA): Of the 11,219 records identified, the vaccine systematic review yielded 92 eligible studies (79 vaccine uptake, 30 vaccine intention, 17 overlapping). In the meta-regression (Adjusted R2 = 0.2285), strategies prioritized specific populations (b=0.121, p=.027), using service quality improvement approaches (b=0.226, p=.040), and recruiting through community-based partner organizations (b =0.585, p=.005) or healthcare organizations (b=0.230, p=.040) were associated with significantly higher vaccine uptake rates. Onsite vaccination was associated with significantly lower uptake rates (b=—0.185, p=.033), an effect that a sensitivity analysis confirmed was COVID-19-context-specific. Narrative synthesis identified multi-component strategies, community partnerships, and health equity-focused designs as consistently associated with more favorable outcomes across both uptake and intention domains. GRADE certainty was LOW to MODERATE across most findings. Project 2 (Recruitment SRMA): Of 5,589 records identified, 43 studies (118 strategy arms) met eligibility criteria. The median enrollment rate across all strategy arms was 32.1% (range: 0%-93%). In the meta-regression (Adjusted R2=0.385), community-based sample pool sources (b=0.331, p=.001) and EHR/registry-based sources (b=0.282, p=.003) were associated with significantly higher enrollment rates relative to other source types. Larger sample sizes were associated with significantly lower enrollment rates (b=—0.0000072, p=.026). Individual study quality was predominantly Weak by EPHPP global rating (58%), with confounders and blinding as the most frequently Weak-rated domains. Project 3 (ReFrame): ReFrame organized recruitment strategy evaluation across five interdependent domains: Strategy Planning and Design; Implementation and Adaptation; Outcome Assessment; Equity and Inclusion Analysis; and Knowledge Sharing and Reporting. The framework integrated the Health Belief Model, Social Ecological Model, CFIR, RE-AIM, CBPR principles, and Diffusion of Innovations Theory, and proposed standardized metrics, practical tools, and minimum and enhanced reporting standards applicable across diverse research contexts. Conclusions: Across both systematic reviews, a consistent pattern emerged: strategies that embedded outreach within existing relational infrastructure, whether clinical (EHR/registry-based) or community (CBPR), outperformed convenience-based approaches that relied on broad, impersonal outreach to undifferentiated audiences. For vaccination, service quality improvement and community-based recruitment pathways were robust predictors of higher uptake. For research recruitment, community-engaged and EHR/registry-based sourcing were the only statistically significant predictors of enrollment success. These findings converged on a single, equity-weighted interpretation: the participant reach and engagement have been determined primarily by where researchers have looked, and the populations most frequently overlooked were those who have borne the greatest burden of health conditions that public health and clinical research have been designed to address. ReFrame has provided an evidence-grounded framework to operationalize this insight into systematic, evaluable, and equitable recruitment practice.en
dc.description.abstractgeneralVaccines and medical research have prevented many deaths and suffering every year. Vaccines have protected people, young and old alike, from diseases that could otherwise have hospitalized or killed them. Medical research has generated the treatments and tools that healthcare providers have relied on to keep communities healthy. But here has been the problem: both vaccines and medical research have tended to reach the same groups of people over and over again, often healthier, wealthier, and more connected, while the people who have needed these services the most have often been left out. This dissertation has asked a simple but uncomfortable question: who has this research been for? In the first project, the question was about vaccines. The United States passed a major healthcare law in 2010, the Affordable Care Act, which eliminated most out-of-pocket costs for recommended vaccines. The thinking was that cost was the barrier. But despite this policy, vaccination rates for influenza, shingles, HPV, and COVID-19 have remained far below national health goals. This dissertation reviewed 92 research studies from 2010 to 2025 to understand which strategies worked to increase vaccine uptake. The findings showed that strategies involving community partnerships, direct service improvement, and focused outreach to specific populations performed significantly better than broad general messaging campaigns. In other words, making vaccines available was not enough; researchers and public health professionals should go where people are and work with communities to build and develop trust and to make vaccination easy rather than just possible. The second project turned to a different but related problem: who has participated in clinical and translational research? For more than 30 years, federal law has required that NIH-funded studies include women and people from underrepresented and vulnerable groups, such as racial and ethnic minorities, low-income individuals, rural residents, persons with disabilities, and others who have historically been excluded. Despite these mandates, the literature has continued to not reflect the diversity of the U.S. population or of the people most burdened by the health conditions being studied. This dissertation reviewed 43 studies that measured how well their recruitment strategies worked. The results showed that two approaches consistently produced better enrollment: recruiting through electronic health records or patient registries (which helped identify eligible persons through trusted clinical channels) and using community-based participatory research (CBPR) approaches, which built partnerships with communities as co-leaders in the research. The third and final part of this dissertation took the lessons from that recruitment review and turned them into a practical framework called ReFrame, the Recruitment Strategy Evaluation Framework. ReFrame is a step-by-step guide for researchers to plan, carry out, evaluate, and share what they learn about their recruitment strategies. It is specifically designed to help research teams think about equity at every step as a standard practice. Taken together, this dissertation has made a case that the people who designed vaccine campaigns and research studies should stop asking, "How do we engage more people?" and begin asking, "How do we reach the people who actually need this research most?" The two questions may sound similar, but they lead to very different decisions about where to look and whom to partner with. The communities most burdened by preventable illness and health disparities deserve to be centered in research that is meant to address those conditions.en
dc.description.degreeDoctor of Philosophyen
dc.format.mediumETDen
dc.identifier.othervt_gsexam:46877en
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10919/143439en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherVirginia Techen
dc.rightsCreative Commons Attribution 4.0 Internationalen
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en
dc.subjectvaccine uptakeen
dc.subjectvaccine intentionen
dc.subjectresearch recruitmenten
dc.subjectunderrepresented populationsen
dc.subjecthealth equityen
dc.subjectsystematic reviewen
dc.subjectAffordable Care Acten
dc.subjectRevitalization Acten
dc.subjectNIH-funded researchen
dc.subjectReFrameen
dc.subjectCBPRen
dc.subjectimplementation scienceen
dc.subjectBeSD modelen
dc.subjectenrollment rateen
dc.titleBridging Gaps: Evaluating Strategies to Improve Vaccine Uptake and Strengthen Clinical and Translational Research Recruitment Among U.S. Adult Populationsen
dc.typeDissertationen
thesis.degree.disciplineTranslational Biology, Medicine and Healthen
thesis.degree.grantorVirginia Polytechnic Institute and State Universityen
thesis.degree.leveldoctoralen
thesis.degree.nameDoctor of Philosophyen

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Hensley_AA_D_2026.pdf
Size:
4.59 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format