ABSTRACT
Background: Emergency risk communication (ERC) is key to achieving compliance with public health measures during pandemics. Yet, the factors that facilitated ERC during COVID-19 have not been analyzed. We compare ERC in the early stages of the pandemic across four socio-economic settings to identify how risk communication can be improved in public health emergencies (PHE). Methods: To map and assess the content, process, actors, and context of ERC in Germany, Guinea, Nigeria, and Singapore, we performed a qualitative document review, and thematically analyzed semi-structured key informant interviews with 155 stakeholders involved in ERC at national and sub-national levels. We applied Walt and Gilson's health policy triangle as a framework to structure the results. Results: We identified distinct ERC strategies in each of the four countries. Various actors, including governmental leads, experts, and organizations with close contact to the public, collaborated closely to implement ERC strategies. Early integration of ERC into preparedness and response plans, lessons from previous experiences, existing structures and networks, and clear leadership were identified as crucial for ensuring message clarity, consistency, relevance, and an efficient use of resources. Areas of improvement primarily included two-way communication, community engagement, and monitoring and evaluation. Countries with recurrent experiences of pandemics appeared to be more prepared and equipped to implement ERC strategies. Conclusion: We found that considerable potential exists for countries to improve communication during public health emergencies, particularly in the areas of bilateral communication and community engagement as well as monitoring and evaluation. Building adaptive structures and maintaining long-term relationships with at-risk communities reportedly facilitated suitable communication. The findings suggest considerable potential and transferable learning opportunities exist between countries in the global north and countries in the global south with experience of managing outbreaks.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Emergencies , Public Health/methods , Communication , Disease OutbreaksABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: During outbreaks, uncertainties experienced by affected communities can influence their compliance to government guidance on public health. Communicators and authorities are, hence, encouraged to acknowledge and address such uncertainties. However, in the midst of public health crises, it can become difficult to define and identify uncertainties that are most relevant to address. We analyzed data on COVID-19-related uncertainties from four socio-economic contexts to explore how uncertainties can influence people's perception of, and response to Risk Communication and Community Engagement (RCCE) strategies. RESULTS: This qualitative study, which adopts an interpretative approach, is based on data from a documentary review, key informant interviews (KII), and focus group discussions (FGD) with members of the general public and people with barriers to information from Germany, Guinea, Nigeria, and Singapore. Transcripts from the KII and FGD were coded and analyzed thematically. We interviewed a total of 155 KIs and conducted 73 FGD. Our analysis uncovered a divergence between uncertainties deemed relevant by stakeholders involved in policy making and uncertainties that people reportedly had to navigate in their everyday lives and which they considered relevant during the pandemic. We identified four types of uncertainties that seemed to have influenced people's assessment of the disease risk and their trust in the pandemic control strategies including RCCE efforts: epidemiological uncertainties (related to the nature and severity of the virus), information uncertainties (related to access to reliable information), social uncertainties (related to social behavior in times of heightened risk), and economic uncertainties (related to financial insecurities). CONCLUSION: We suggest that in future outbreaks, communicators and policy makers could improve the way in which affected communities assess their risk, and increase the trust of these communities in response efforts by addressing non-epidemiological uncertainties in RCCE strategies.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Communication , Disease Outbreaks , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , Public HealthABSTRACT
Risk communication plays a central role in public health emergencies: it must enable informed decisions, promote protective or life-sustaining behaviour, and maintain trust in public institutions. In addition, uncertainties in knowledge must be named transparently; irrational fears and rumours must be refuted. Success factors for risk communication are the participation of citizens as well as the continuous recording of risk perception and risk competence in population groups. The current COVID-19 (corona virus disease 2019) pandemic poses specific challenges for risk communication.The state of knowledge on many important aspects concerning COVID-19 was and is often uncertain or preliminary, e.g. on transmission, symptoms, long-term effects and immunity. Communication is characterised by scientific language and an array of figures and statistics, which can render the content difficult to understand. Alongside the official announcements and statements by experts, COVID-19 is widely communicated on social media, spreading misinformation and speculation; this "infodemic" can complicate risk communication.Various national and international scientific projects will help tailor risk communication on COVID-19 to target groups and thereby render it more effective. These projects include explorative studies on how people deal with COVID-19-related information; the COVID-19 Snapshot Monitoring (COSMO) project, a regularly conducted online survey on risk perception and protective behaviour; and an interdisciplinary qualitative study that compares the design, implementation and effectiveness of risk communication strategies in four countries.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Social Media , Communication , Germany/epidemiology , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
The present study explores the coverage of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and its associated risks in the German press between 1993 and 2013. Using quantitative content analysis, we explored the corpus of newspaper articles to evaluate the quality of risk reporting. Our findings show an overall increase in the quality of risk-related information: articles contain more substantiating statements describing objectively cognizable phenomena with absolute numbers, prevalences, estimations, and tendencies over time. There is also an increase in the level of precision of such statements. On the other hand, the results suggest that there is little contextualization of risk information and mortality data is often communicated in absolute numbers, which makes it harder to understand and interpret the information. While the debate about the risks of AMR is led by the scientific community, the overall tone of the coverage is alarmist, which can result in growing skepticism of scientific expertise.
