HealthyNCT07488962
Building Cognitive Resilience to Vaccine Misinformation Using AI: Evidence From a Randomised Trial
A study testing AI-driven chatbot and Social media infographic in people with Healthy, run by London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine at 1 site in United Kingdom.
Trial summary
This study aims to understand how parents and caregivers in the United Kingdom engage with information about childhood vaccination (routine vaccines for children and adolescents, excluding tetanus or international travel-related vaccines) and how tailored digital health tools can help address childhood vaccine… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 20 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Healthy
- What is being tested?
- AI-driven chatbot and Social media infographic
- Type of treatment
- Vaccines, Pill or oral medicine, Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 1,008 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited Kingdom
- Study dates
- 6 Jul 2026to 22 Jul 2026
- 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 20 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Parents or primary caregivers of at least one child under 18 years of age in the UK who is able to answer questions about their child's vaccination status;
- Those who have basic literacy in English;
- Those who have regular access to a digital device and the internet; and
- Those who provide informed consent and agree to participate in the trial
Who cannot join
- Those who have a visual/reading disability that could prevent their participation in or completion of the study activities
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United Kingdom1 site
London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
London
About this study
Official title: Building Cognitive Resilience to Vaccine Misinformation Using Conversational AI: Evidence From a UK Randomised Trial
This study aims to understand how parents and caregivers in the United Kingdom engage with information about childhood vaccination (routine vaccines for children and adolescents, excluding tetanus or international travel-related vaccines) and how tailored digital health tools can help address childhood vaccine misinformation.
Read the detailed description
Global evidence shows that harmful and misleading information spreads rapidly online and can undermine trust in public health guidance. The World Health Organization has described this challenge as an "infodemic." In the United Kingdom (UK), most people obtain news through online platforms, and false information travels faster and further than accurate content. Vaccination is among the areas most affected. Many UK parents report encountering anti- vaccine claims online, and research shows that such exposure is linked to reduced vaccine confidence and lower uptake.
These concerns arise at a time when routine childhood vaccination rates in the UK have declined below WHO targets, contributing to renewed outbreaks of preventable diseases such as measles. Studies also show that simply providing more factual information is often insufficient to counter misinformation. Cognitive biases - such as confirmation bias, emotional reasoning, and low perceived risk - shape how people interpret health information. Systematic reviews suggest that pre-emptive approaches based on inoculation theory ("prebunking"), which warn people about common manipulation tactics and provide weakened examples of misinformation, can strengthen their ability to recognise and resist false claims.
At the same time, advances in artificial intelligence have created opportunities to deliver personalised, interactive health communication at scale. Emerging evidence indicates that brief conversations with AI-enabled, vaccine-focused chatbots can improve rumour recognition, encourage informed decision-making, and reduce belief in false narratives by providing personalised, interactive, and accessible information. Building on this evidence, this project will test whether an AI-based chatbot can help parents identify misleading claims about childhood vaccinations and increase their confidence in making childhood vaccination decisions.
This study aims to evaluate whether an AI-driven chatbot, MindShield, can strengthen resilience to vaccine misinformation by directly engaging the cognitive biases - such as confirmation bias, affective reasoning, and optimism bias - that shape vaccine risk perception and decision-making. We will first identify bias patterns underlying misinformation beliefs among parents in the UK. MindShield, grounded in inoculation theory, will then be evaluated in a randomised controlled trial to test whether short, bias-aware conversations improve bias recognition, misinformation discernment, and vaccine confidence compared with factual information alone. Finally, we will assess the scalability, acceptability, and ethical considerations of bias-targeted AI interventions for broader misinformation contexts. The study asks whether conversational AI can act as a cognitive safeguard, helping individuals recognise and resist manipulative narratives while supporting informed, confident health decisions.
We will conduct a randomised controlled trial with 1,000 parents or caregivers of children under 18 in the UK. Eligible participants will be recruited online and randomly assigned to either:
- Intervention group: a brief interaction with MindShield, an AI-based chatbot introducing three common misinformation tactics-logical fallacies, emotional manipulation, and risk-perception biases-through short explanations and interactive examples; or
- Control group: a "myth versus fact" infographic adapted from official public health communication materials presenting evidence-based information on the same topics
All participants will complete baseline and immediate post-intervention questionnaires. The primary outcome is parents' ability to correctly distinguish true from false childhood vaccine statements. Secondary outcomes include vaccine confidence, willingness to vaccinate, perceived risks, self-efficacy, and perceptions of AI. Participants in the intervention group will also assess the chatbot's acceptability and usability. Quantitative data will be analysed using mixed-effects models following intention-to-treat principles. The findings will help determine whether an AI-based, vaccine-focused chatbot can strengthen resilience to misinformation and improve informed decision-making around childhood vaccination. A subsequent scale-up to additional countries is planned, intended to evaluate cross-cultural generalizability.
- Conditions
- Healthy
- Being tested
- AI-driven chatbot, Social media infographic
- Keywords
- childhood vaccine, AI, chatbot, randomized controlled trial
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
AI-driven chatbotBehavioural
A tailored AI-driven chatbot designed to counter vaccine misinformation.
Social media infographicBehavioural
A UNICEF social media infographic with three "myth vs. fact" statements on vaccination.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| AI-driven chatbot | Experimental | An interactive, web-based, AI-driven chatbot intervention designed to counter vaccine misinformation. It can be accessed via a personal computer, tablet, or mobile device through a web- browser link. Receives: Behavioral: AI-driven chatbot |
| Social media infographic | Active comparator | A UNICEF social media infographic with three "myth vs. fact" statements on vaccination that correspond to the same misinformation tactics explained by the MindShield chatbot. Receives: Behavioral: Social media infographic |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Parental susceptibility to misinformation about childhood vaccination
The primary outcome of this study will assess parental susceptibility to misinformation about childhood vaccination, defined as parents' ability to accurately distinguish between true and false vaccine-related information. This will be measured using ten statements on childhood vaccines, including four true and six false, rumour-related statements. Two of the rumour-related statements correspond to each of the three misinformation tactics introduced by the chatbot and the UNICEF infographic. This measure reflects parents' ability to identify misinformation containing manipulation tactics they were inoculated against and to distinguish true from false information regarding childhood vaccination. Responses will be recorded as "True", "False", or "Don't know". A composite misinformation susceptibility score will be calculated based on the number of correct responses, with higher scores indicating greater ability to identify vaccine misinformation accurately.
Measured: From enrollment to the endpoint assessment immediately following the intervention during the same survey session (approximately 20-30 minutes)
Secondary outcomes (1)
Self-efficacy
Participants' self-efficacy will be evaluated in two domains: (a) confidence in making informed vaccination decisions for their children, measured with a binary response of "Yes" or "No", and (b) confidence in seeking trustworthy information about childhood vaccinations, measured on a four-point scale from "Not at all confident" to "Very confident".
Measured: From enrollment to the endpoint assessment immediately following the intervention during the same survey session (approximately 20-30 minutes)
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted23 Mar 2026
- Study start6 Jul 2026
- Primary completion22 Jul 2026
- Study completion22 Jul 2026
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for HealthyStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- 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
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Investigator, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 1,008 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- The University of Hong Kong
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07488962
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- LSHTM32923
- Other IDs
- 2025-KEP-1223
- Status last verified
- Mar 2026
- First submitted
- 9 Mar 2026
- Last updated
- 28 Sep 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 28 Sep 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Building Cognitive Resilience to Vaccine Misinformation Using Conversational AI: Evidence From a UK Randomised Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07488962
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- LSHTM32923
- Conditions
- Healthy
- Keywords
- childhood vaccine, AI, chatbot, randomized controlled trial
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 1,008 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- London School of Hygiene and Tropical MedicineUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- The University of Hong Kong
- Study start
- 6 Jul 2026 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 22 Jul 2026 (actual)
- Study completion
- 22 Jul 2026 (actual)
- First posted
- 23 Mar 2026 (actual)
- 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.
This study aims to understand how parents and caregivers in the United Kingdom engage with information about childhood vaccination (routine vaccines for children and adolescents, excluding tetanus or international travel-related vaccines) and how tailored digital health tools can help address childhood vaccine misinformation.
Detailed description
Global evidence shows that harmful and misleading information spreads rapidly online and can undermine trust in public health guidance. The World Health Organization has described this challenge as an "infodemic." In the United Kingdom (UK), most people obtain news through online platforms, and false information travels faster and further than accurate content. Vaccination is among the areas most affected. Many UK parents report encountering anti- vaccine claims online, and research shows that such exposure is linked to reduced vaccine confidence and lower uptake.
These concerns arise at a time when routine childhood vaccination rates in the UK have declined below WHO targets, contributing to renewed outbreaks of preventable diseases such as measles. Studies also show that simply providing more factual information is often insufficient to counter misinformation. Cognitive biases - such as confirmation bias, emotional reasoning, and low perceived risk - shape how people interpret health information. Systematic reviews suggest that pre-emptive approaches based on inoculation theory ("prebunking"), which warn people about common manipulation tactics and provide weakened examples of misinformation, can strengthen their ability to recognise and resist false claims.
At the same time, advances in artificial intelligence have created opportunities to deliver personalised, interactive health communication at scale. Emerging evidence indicates that brief conversations with AI-enabled, vaccine-focused chatbots can improve rumour recognition, encourage informed decision-making, and reduce belief in false narratives by providing personalised, interactive, and accessible information. Building on this evidence, this project will test whether an AI-based chatbot can help parents identify misleading claims about childhood vaccinations and increase their confidence in making childhood vaccination decisions.
This study aims to evaluate whether an AI-driven chatbot, MindShield, can strengthen resilience to vaccine misinformation by directly engaging the cognitive biases - such as confirmation bias, affective reasoning, and optimism bias - that shape vaccine risk perception and decision-making. We will first identify bias patterns underlying misinformation beliefs among parents in the UK. MindShield, grounded in inoculation theory, will then be evaluated in a randomised controlled trial to test whether short, bias-aware conversations improve bias recognition, misinformation discernment, and vaccine confidence compared with factual information alone. Finally, we will assess the scalability, acceptability, and ethical considerations of bias-targeted AI interventions for broader misinformation contexts. The study asks whether conversational AI can act as a cognitive safeguard, helping individuals recognise and resist manipulative narratives while supporting informed, confident health decisions.
We will conduct a randomised controlled trial with 1,000 parents or caregivers of children under 18 in the UK. Eligible participants will be recruited online and randomly assigned to either:
- Intervention group: a brief interaction with MindShield, an AI-based chatbot introducing three common misinformation tactics-logical fallacies, emotional manipulation, and risk-perception biases-through short explanations and interactive examples; or
- Control group: a "myth versus fact" infographic adapted from official public health communication materials presenting evidence-based information on the same topics
All participants will complete baseline and immediate post-intervention questionnaires. The primary outcome is parents' ability to correctly distinguish true from false childhood vaccine statements. Secondary outcomes include vaccine confidence, willingness to vaccinate, perceived risks, self-efficacy, and perceptions of AI. Participants in the intervention group will also assess the chatbot's acceptability and usability. Quantitative data will be analysed using mixed-effects models following intention-to-treat principles. The findings will help determine whether an AI-based, vaccine-focused chatbot can strengthen resilience to misinformation and improve informed decision-making around childhood vaccination. A subsequent scale-up to additional countries is planned, intended to evaluate cross-cultural generalizability.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (investigator, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| AI-driven chatbot | Experimental | Behavioral: AI-driven chatbotAn interactive, web-based, AI-driven chatbot intervention designed to counter vaccine misinformation. It can be accessed via a personal computer, tablet, or mobile device through a web- browser link. |
| Social media infographic | Active comparator | Behavioral: Social media infographicA UNICEF social media infographic with three "myth vs. fact" statements on vaccination that correspond to the same misinformation tactics explained by the MindShield chatbot. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 20 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Parents or primary caregivers of at least one child under 18 years of age in the UK who is able to answer questions about their child's vaccination status;
- Those who have basic literacy in English;
- Those who have regular access to a digital device and the internet; and
- Those who provide informed consent and agree to participate in the trial
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Those who have a visual/reading disability that could prevent their participation in or completion of the study activities
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 |
|---|---|---|
| AI-driven chatbotA tailored AI-driven chatbot designed to counter vaccine misinformation. | Behavioural | AI-driven chatbot |
| Social media infographicA UNICEF social media infographic with three "myth vs. fact" statements on vaccination. | Behavioural | Social media infographic |
Primary outcome
Parental susceptibility to misinformation about childhood vaccination
Time frame: From enrollment to the endpoint assessment immediately following the intervention during the same survey session (approximately 20-30 minutes)
The primary outcome of this study will assess parental susceptibility to misinformation about childhood vaccination, defined as parents' ability to accurately distinguish between true and false vaccine-related information. This will be measured using ten statements on childhood vaccines, including four true and six false, rumour-related statements. Two of the rumour-related statements correspond to each of the three misinformation tactics introduced by the chatbot and the UNICEF infographic. This measure reflects parents' ability to identify misinformation containing manipulation tactics they were inoculated against and to distinguish true from false information regarding childhood vaccination. Responses will be recorded as "True", "False", or "Don't know". A composite misinformation susceptibility score will be calculated based on the number of correct responses, with higher scores indicating greater ability to identify vaccine misinformation accurately.
1 secondary outcome
Self-efficacy
Time frame: From enrollment to the endpoint assessment immediately following the intervention during the same survey session (approximately 20-30 minutes)
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 28 Sep 2026.
Related trials for Healthy
Recruiting
THE EFFECTS OF GAME-BASED EXERCISE PROGRAMS
Physical Activity, Body Image
Not yet recruitingPhase 1
A Phase I Study of GLR2053 Tablets in Chinese Healthy Adult Participants
Atopic Dermatitis
Recruiting
Colon-delivered Riboflavin and Gut Microbiota Composition
Microbiome Dysbiosis, Gut Health
Not yet recruiting
Neuroergonomic Analysis of a Brain-Computer Interface Device (BCI)
Healthy Volunteers - Male and Female
RecruitingPhase 1
First-in-Human Trial to Assess REGN20423 in Healthy Adult Participants and Adult Participants With Atopic Dermatitis
Healthy Volunteer, Atopic Dermatitis
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.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing AI-driven chatbot and Social media infographic in people with Healthy, run by London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine at 1 site in United Kingdom.
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 4 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 28 Sep 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United Kingdom. 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?
Parental susceptibility to misinformation about childhood vaccination (time frame: From enrollment to the endpoint assessment immediately following the intervention during the same survey session (approximately 20-30 minutes)). 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 28 Sep 2026.