Revisiting the Importance of Risk Communication for Public Health Practitioners

2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul L. Knechtges ◽  
Gregory D. Kearney ◽  
Stephanie L. Richards
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Risk Communication ◽  
Health Practitioners ◽  
Public Health Practitioners

scholarly journals Assessing Knowledge and Application of Emergency Risk Communication Principles Among Public Health Workers in China

2014 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 199-205 ◽  
Author(s):  
James R. Cope ◽  
Melinda Frost ◽  
Li Richun ◽  
Ruiqian Xie
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Risk Communication ◽  
Health Workers ◽  
International Health ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Local Public Health ◽  
Public Health Agencies ◽  
Health Agencies ◽  
Health Practitioners ◽  
Public Health Practitioners

AbstractObjectiveSince 2003, the Chinese National Health and Family Planning Commission (formerly the Ministry of Health) has implemented changes to more effectively communicate risk during public health emergencies. In spite of ongoing improvements, provincial and sub-provincial leaders face barriers, such as established modes of operation, lack of training, shortage of trained risk communicators, and limited understanding and willingness of recipients to mitigate risks.MethodsWe assessed the current status of and barriers to risk communication knowledge and practice among public health practitioners in China. We designed the survey questionnaire to capture information related to the risk communication core capacities required by international health regulations and common risk communication principles.ResultsOur findings showed that risk communication training has successfully developed an awareness of risk communication principles and the ability to implement those principles in practice in China.ConclusionsFuture efforts should focus on areas such as a dedicated risk communication workforce, requirements that public health agencies develop a risk communication plan, and additional training for public health practitioners and their partners. It is critical that the infectious diseases prevention and control law be amended to grant provincial and local public health agencies more autonomy to release information. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2014;0:1-7)

scholarly journals Evidence synthesis - Evaluating risk communication during extreme weather and climate change: a scoping review

2019 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 142-156 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elaina MacIntyre ◽  
Sanjay Khanna ◽  
Anthea Darychuk ◽  
Ray Copes ◽  
Brian Schwartz
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Climate Change ◽  
Risk Communication ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Extreme Weather ◽  
Extreme Weather Events ◽  
Health Practitioners ◽  
Weather And Climate ◽  
Public Health Practitioners

Introduction Communicating risk to the public continues to be a challenge for public health practitioners working in the area of climate change. We conducted a scoping literature review on the evaluation of risk communication for extreme weather and climate change to inform local public health messaging, consistent with requirements under the Ontario Public Health Standards (OPHS), which were updated in 2018 to include effective communication regarding climate change and extreme weather. Methods Search strategies were developed by library information specialists and used to retrieve peer-reviewed academic and grey literature from bibliographic databases (Medline, Embase, Scopus and CINAHL) and Google country specific searches, respectively. The search strategy was validated through a workshop with experts and community stakeholders, with expertise in environment, health, emergency management and risk communication. Results A total of 43 articles were included. These articles addressed issues such as: climate change (n = 22), flooding (n = 12), hurricane events (n = 5), extreme heat (n = 2), and wild fires (n = 2). Studies were predominantly from the US (n = 14), Europe (n = 6) and Canada (n = 5). Conclusion To meet the OPHS 2018, public health practitioners need to engage in effective risk communication to motivate local actions that mitigate the effects of extreme weather and climate change. Based on the scoping review, risk communication efforts during short-term extreme weather events appear to be more effective than efforts to communicate risk around climate change. This distinction could highlight a unique opportunity for public health to adapt strategies commonly used for extreme weather to climate change.

scholarly journals What makes a ‘successful’ collaborative research project between public health practitioners and academics? A mixed-methods review of funding applications submitted to a local intervention evaluation scheme

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter van der Graaf ◽  
Lindsay Blank ◽  
Eleanor Holding ◽  
Elizabeth Goyder
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Collaborative Research ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Public Health Practice ◽  
Rapid Review ◽  
Success Rates ◽  
Evaluation Scheme ◽  
Health Practitioners ◽  
Public Health Practitioners

Abstract Background The national Public Health Practice Evaluation Scheme (PHPES) is a response-mode funded evaluation programme operated by the National Institute for Health Research School for Public Health Research (NIHR SPHR). The scheme enables public health professionals to work in partnership with SPHR researchers to conduct rigorous evaluations of their interventions. Our evaluation reviewed the learning from the first five years of PHPES (2013–2017) and how this was used to implement a revised scheme within the School. Methods We conducted a rapid review of applications and reports from 81 PHPES projects and sampled eight projects (including unfunded) to interview one researcher and one practitioner involved in each sampled project (n = 16) in order to identify factors that influence success of applications and effective delivery and dissemination of evaluations. Findings from the review and interviews were tested in an online survey with practitioners (applicants), researchers (principal investigators [PIs]) and PHPES panel members (n = 19) to explore the relative importance of these factors. Findings from the survey were synthesised and discussed for implications at a national workshop with wider stakeholders, including public members (n = 20). Results Strengths: PHPES provides much needed resources for evaluation which often are not available locally, and produces useful evidence to understand where a programme is not delivering, which can be used to formatively develop interventions. Weaknesses: Objectives of PHPES were too narrowly focused on (cost-)effectiveness of interventions, while practitioners also valued implementation studies and process evaluations. Opportunities: PHPES provided opportunities for novel/promising but less developed ideas. More funded time to develop a protocol and ensure feasibility of the intervention prior to application could increase intervention delivery success rates. Threats: There can be tensions between researchers and practitioners, for example, on the need to show the 'success’ of the intervention, on the use of existing research evidence, and the importance of generalisability of findings and of generating peer-reviewed publications. Conclusions The success of collaborative research projects between public health practitioners (PHP) and researchers can be improved by funders being mindful of tensions related to (1) the scope of collaborations, (2) local versus national impact, and (3) increasing inequalities in access to funding. Our study and comparisons with related funding schemes demonstrate how these tensions can be successfully resolved.

scholarly journals After Action Review of the 2019 measles outbreak in Clark County, Washington, U.S.A

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
M Stoto ◽  
R Piltch-Loeb ◽  
R Wolfe ◽  
R Albrandt ◽  
A Melnick
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Religious Community ◽  
Local Health ◽  
Mutual Aid ◽  
Social Distancing ◽  
Clark County ◽  
After Action Review ◽  
Measles Outbreak ◽  
Health Practitioners ◽  
Public Health Practitioners

Abstract Issue Clark County experienced a measles outbreak that challenged public health authorities. Description of the practice: We conducted a formal After Action Review with state and local health officials, school officials, and others to identify lessons for public health practitioners facing future outbreaks. Results Following the early identification of measles in a child who had recently arrived from Ukraine, active surveillance identified 71 confirmed cases, most in unvaccinated persons under 18 years of age. 4,138 contacts were traced and public health personnel made daily monitoring calls to 816. 53 potential exposure sites in healthcare facilities, schools and other public places were identified and communicated to the public. As a social distancing measure, unvaccinated students, teachers, and staff were excluded from schools in which exposure had occurred. Ascertaining susceptibility status was challenging. The national anti-vaccination sentiment and a parallel outbreak in a New York religious community created challenges in representing community risk while avoiding stigmatization of a community in which the first reported case was identified. Rather than respond to every false claim on social media, the health department developed talking points about emerging issues and engaged the community in dialogue. Lessons Responding to the measles outbreak required innovative approaches to surveillance and contact tracing, social distancing (school exclusions), and emergency risk communication. The response required extensive coordinated efforts of the county and state health departments, school systems, and many other organizations. Mutual aid enabled an influx of resources but managing the surge of responders proved challenging. Key messages Public health emergencies require effective emergency management practices. Carefully conducted After Action Reviews of health emergencies can help public health practitioners identify challenges and innovative practices.

Characterizing the acceptability of a vaccine for West Nile virus by public health practitioners

Vaccine ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 28 (19) ◽  
pp. 3423-3427 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tasha Epp ◽  
Shannon Waldner ◽  
Judith Wright ◽  
Phil Curry ◽  
Hugh G. Townsend ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
West Nile Virus ◽  
West Nile ◽  
Health Practitioners ◽  
Public Health Practitioners

scholarly journals Aging clinical problems: a difficult balance between age and frailty

2016 ◽  
Vol 84 (1-2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Renzo Rozzini
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Older Adults ◽  
Weight Loss ◽  
Elevated Risk ◽  
Geriatric Syndrome ◽  
Central Focus ◽  
Health Practitioners ◽  
And Function ◽  
Public Health Practitioners ◽  
Clinical Problems

<p>Frailty is a common geriatric syndrome that embodies an elevated risk of catastrophic declines in health and function among older adults. Frailty is a condition associated with ageing with associated weakness, slowing, decreased energy, lower activity, and, when severe, unintended weight loss. As a population ages, a central focus of geriatricians and public health practitioners is to understand, and then beneficially intervene on, the factors and processes that put elders at such risk, especially the increased vulnerability to stressors (e.g. extremes of heat and cold, infection, injury, or even changes in medication) that characterizes many older adults. The syndrome of geriatric frailty is hypothesized to reflect impairments in the regulation of multiple physiologic systems, embodying a lack of resilience to physiologic challenges and thus elevated risk for a range of deleterious endpoints. The empirical assessment of geriatric frailty in individuals seeks to capture this or related features.</p><p><strong>Riassunto</strong></p><p>Fragilità è la predisposizione alla rottura, al danno. L’etimologia della parola fragilità da "frango", rompere, rimanda alla nozione di qualche cosa che se sottoposto a una pressione, a un impatto, rischia di danneggiarsi facilmente. E’ dunque una nozione ampia e intuitiva che può avere ambiti di precisazione più diversi a seconda che se ne parli in fisica (dove esistono dei coefficienti esatti) piuttosto che nei campi della morale o del sentimento, dove la valutazione sarà sempre più "poetica" e affidata alla sensibilità individuale.</p>

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document