Effective Communication During an Influenza Pandemic: The Value of Using a Crisis and Emergency Risk Communication Framework

2008 ◽  
Vol 9 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 13S-17S ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Reynolds ◽  
Sandra Crouse Quinn
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Risk Communication ◽  
Scientific Reasoning ◽  
Influenza Pandemic ◽  
Essential Elements ◽  
Persuasive Communication ◽  
Communication Framework ◽  
Conflicting Information ◽  
Scientific Experts ◽  
Positive Action

During a crisis, an open and empathetic style of communication that engenders the public's trust is the most effective when officials are attempting to galvanize the population to take a positive action or refrain from a harmful act. Although trust is imperative in a crisis, public suspicions of scientific experts and government are increasing for a variety of reasons, including access to more sources of conflicting information, a reduction in the use of scientific reasoning in decision making, and political infighting. Trust and credibility—which are demonstrated through empathy and caring, competence and expertise, honesty and openness, and dedication and commitment—are essential elements of persuasive communication.

Observer Ratings of Shared Decision Making Do Not Match Patient Reports: An Observational Study in 5 Family Medicine Practices

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-59
Author(s):  
Gisèle Diendéré ◽  
Imen Farhat ◽  
Holly Witteman ◽  
Ruth Ndjaboue
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Family Medicine ◽  
Risk Communication ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Clinical Encounter ◽  
Values Clarification ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Medical Consultations

Background Measuring shared decision making (SDM) in clinical practice is important to improve the quality of health care. Measurement can be done by trained observers and by people participating in the clinical encounter, namely, patients. This study aimed to describe the correlations between patients’ and observers’ ratings of SDM using 2 validated and 2 nonvalidated SDM measures in clinical consultations. Methods In this cross-sectional study, we recruited 238 complete dyads of health professionals and patients in 5 university-affiliated family medicine clinics in Canada. Participants completed self-administered questionnaires before and after audio-recorded medical consultations. Observers rated the occurrence of SDM during medical consultations using both the validated OPTION-5 (the 5-item “observing patient involvement” score) and binary questions on risk communication and values clarification (RCVC-observer). Patients rated SDM using both the 9-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q9) and binary questions on risk communication and values clarification (RCVC-patient). Results Agreement was low between observers’ and patients’ ratings of SDM using validated OPTION-5 and SDM-Q9, respectively (ρ = 0.07; P = 0.38). Observers’ ratings using RCVC-observer were correlated to patients’ ratings using either SDM-Q9 ( rpb = −0.16; P = 0.01) or RCVC-patients ( rpb = 0.24; P = 0.03). Observers’ OPTION-5 scores and patients’ ratings using RCVC-questions were moderately correlated ( rφ = 0.33; P = 0.04). Conclusion There was moderate to no alignment between observers’ and patients’ ratings of SDM using both validated and nonvalidated measures. This lack of strong correlation emphasizes that observer and patient perspectives are not interchangeable. When assessing the presence, absence, or extent of SDM, it is important to clearly state whose perspectives are reflected.

New Technology in Agriculture Using Neutrosophic Soft Matrices with the Help of Score Function

2020 ◽  
pp. 78-88
Author(s):  
Muhammad Naveed Jafar ◽  
Ahmad Raza Shafiq ◽  
Muhammad Khalid ◽  
Hamza Akbar ◽  
Aamir Naveed ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
New Technology ◽  
Score Function ◽  
Uncertain Environments ◽  
Scientific Experts ◽  
Selection Of

Uncertainty is a big problem in our routine life. Many theories were developed to handle uncertain environments. This paper approaches the concept of neutrosophic soft matrices (NSM) and multiple types of NSM to achieve solutions to a possible problem and provide ideas to tackle other problems relating to uncertainties. Here, NSM has been utilized to demonstrate the performance of different farmers, and further score function has been implemented to solve a possible application of decision making in agriculture. It explains the selection of the best farmer by scientific experts through an algorithm in this paper. The selection based upon the better production of crop and nature, fertilizer, pesticides, etc. are used as attributes, which will contribute to the performance of each farmer. Finally, combining the attributes, which will help us achieve a conclusion to determine the best farmer.

Geographic Marketing in Support of Decision-Making Processes

2020 ◽  
pp. 103-115
Author(s):  
Maria Fernanda Augusto
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Geographic Information ◽  
Essential Elements ◽  
Added Value ◽  
Key Factors ◽  
Digital Maps ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
Growth Prospects ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Different Sources

Nowadays, geographic information and spatial aspects are essential elements for the definition of companies' strategies. With the use of different sources data, companies were able to obtain insights that they could not obtain without the spatial component and were able to use them to optimize their business. Then, geographic marketing presents itself as an added value for companies, one of the key factors being its role in supporting decision making. The main attributes of geographic marketing or GeoMarketing allow us to identify and present through digital maps the behavior and trends of certain variables based on characteristics of a market. The meticulous study of spatial and demographic information generated by GeoMarketing are crucial for important strategic adjustments in the business plan, such as definitions related to the location considered ideal for the business, target audience, price and growth prospects, among other factors. In this context, GeoMarketing will be introduced, exploring its scope, applicability, and relevance of its use in support of the decision-making process.

A Brief Comment on Science-based Risk Regulation Within the European Union

2012 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 86-91 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Stibernitz
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
Central Position ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Risk Regulation ◽  
General Acceptance ◽  
Scientific Experts ◽  
Democratic Control ◽  
The One

Nowadays as political decision making involves such a huge range of complex matters, scientific experts have become more and more involved in European risk regulation. The support by so-called independent experts may, on the one hand, be seen as a guarantee of rational decision making, increasing the quality of decisions as well as the general acceptance of all people affected. On the other hand, the number of expert groups, scientific committees and agencies helping the Commission in fulfilling its duties is vast and confusing.In addition, scientific advisory bodies often face the burden of unrealizable independence, as well as a lack of transparency and democratic control. This article sums up the central position of science-based risk regulation within the European Union (EU), referring to the necessity for expert opinion as well as to consequent problems concerning the involvement of these experts in risk regulatory actions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document