Rapid Review of Virus Risk Communication Interventions: Directions for COVID-19

Overview

Journal Patient Educ Couns

Publisher Elsevier

Specialties Health Services
Nursing

Date 2021 Feb 15

PMID 33583651

Citations 10

Authors

Darren M Winograd

Cara L Fresquez

Madison Egli

Emily K Peterson

Alyssa R Lombardi

Allison Megale

Yajaira A Cabrera Tineo

Michael G Verile

Alison L Phillips

Jessica Y Breland

Susan Santos

Lisa M McAndrew

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objective: In response to COVID-19, we conducted a rapid review of risk communication interventions to mitigate risk from viruses to determine if such interventions are efficacious.

Methods: We searched for risk communication interventions in four databases: Medline, PsycInfo, the ProQuest Coronavirus Research Database, and CENTRAL. The search produced 1572 articles. Thirty-one articles were included in the final review.

Results: Results showed risk communication interventions can produce cognitive and behavior changes around viruses. Results were more consistently positive for interventions focused on HIV/AIDS as compared to influenza. There was no consistent best intervention approach when comparing peer health, audio/visual, and intensive multi-media interventions. Tailoring risk communication toward a target population, in comparison to not tailoring, was related to better outcomes.

Conclusion: The results suggest that risk communication interventions can be efficacious at reducing risk from viruses. They also highlight the complexity of risk communication interventions. Additional research is needed to understand the mechanisms that lead risk communication to reduce risk from viruses.

Practical Value: Results support risk communication interventions to reduce risk from viruses.

Citing Articles

Individual Characteristics in the Comprehension of Pandemic Video Communication: Randomized Controlled Between-Subjects Design.

Lungu D, Roislien J, Smeets I, Wiig S, Bronnick K J Med Internet Res. 2024; 26:e48882.

PMID: 39631064 PMC: 11656110. DOI: 10.2196/48882.

Factors affecting hand hygiene practice during the COVID-19 pandemic in the Zimbabwean population: a qualitative study.

Midzi N, Mutsaka-Makuvaza M, Charimari L, Mangwiro P, Manengureni T, Mugadza G BMC Infect Dis. 2024; 24(1):385.

PMID: 38594631 PMC: 11003113. DOI: 10.1186/s12879-024-09277-1.

Fight COVID Milwaukee protective behaviors and risk communications associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.

Titi M, Keval A, Martinez E, Dickson-Gomez J, Young S, Meurer J Sci Rep. 2023; 13(1):22949.

PMID: 38135690 PMC: 10746720. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-49829-0.

Adaptation of a bidirectional crisis and emergency risk communication framework by community-engaged research partnerships in rural Mississippi during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Washington R, Weis J, Monger M, Burse N, Melvin S, Omondi A J Clin Transl Sci. 2023; 7(1):e79.

PMID: 37125068 PMC: 10130849. DOI: 10.1017/cts.2023.15.

Improving the adherence to COVID-19 preventive measures in the community: Evidence brief for policy.

Fulone I, Barreto J, Barberato-Filho S, Bergamaschi C, Lopes L Front Public Health. 2022; 10:894958.

PMID: 35979464 PMC: 9376604. DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.894958.

References

Hollands G, French D, Griffin S, Prevost A, Sutton S, King S . The impact of communicating genetic risks of disease on risk-reducing health behaviour: systematic review with meta-analysis. BMJ. 2016; 352:i1102. PMC: 4793156. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.i1102. View

Mazza C, Ricci E, Biondi S, Colasanti M, Ferracuti S, Napoli C . A Nationwide Survey of Psychological Distress among Italian People during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Immediate Psychological Responses and Associated Factors. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020; 17(9). PMC: 7246819. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17093165. View

Zhong W . Simulating influenza pandemic dynamics with public risk communication and individual responsive behavior. Comput Math Organ Theory. 2020; 23(4):475-495. PMC: 7087887. DOI: 10.1007/s10588-016-9238-9. View

Howick J, Moscrop A, Mebius A, Fanshawe T, Lewith G, Bishop F . Effects of empathic and positive communication in healthcare consultations: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J R Soc Med. 2018; 111(7):240-252. PMC: 6047264. DOI: 10.1177/0141076818769477. View

Scherr C, Jensen J, Christy K . Dispositional pandemic worry and the health belief model: promoting vaccination during pandemic events. J Public Health (Oxf). 2016; 39(4):e242-e250. DOI: 10.1093/pubmed/fdw101. View

Janssen E, Ruiter R, Waters E . Combining risk communication strategies to simultaneously convey the risks of four diseases associated with physical inactivity to socio-demographically diverse populations. J Behav Med. 2017; 41(3):318-332. PMC: 5899069. DOI: 10.1007/s10865-017-9894-3. View

Wachinger G, Renn O, Begg C, Kuhlicke C . The risk perception paradox--implications for governance and communication of natural hazards. Risk Anal. 2013; 33(6):1049-65. DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01942.x. View

Penta M, Baban A . Message Framing in Vaccine Communication: A Systematic Review of Published Literature. Health Commun. 2017; 33(3):299-314. DOI: 10.1080/10410236.2016.1266574. View

Klein K, Watson L, Ash J, Eden K . Evaluation of risk communication in a mammography patient decision aid. Patient Educ Couns. 2016; 99(7):1240-1248. PMC: 5022358. DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2016.02.013. View

10.

Bertrand J, Anhang R . The effectiveness of mass media in changing HIV/AIDS-related behaviour among young people in developing countries. World Health Organ Tech Rep Ser. 2006; 938:205-41. View

11.

Ibuka Y, Chapman G, Meyers L, Li M, Galvani A . The dynamics of risk perceptions and precautionary behavior in response to 2009 (H1N1) pandemic influenza. BMC Infect Dis. 2010; 10:296. PMC: 2964717. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2334-10-296. View

12.

Falato R, Ricciardi S, Franco G . [Influenza risk perception and vaccination attitude in medical and nursing students during the vaccination campaigns of 2007/2008 (seasonal influenza) and 2009/2010 (H1N1 influenza)]. Med Lav. 2011; 102(2):208-15. View

13.

Guyatt G, Oxman A, Vist G, Kunz R, Falck-Ytter Y, Alonso-Coello P . GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2008; 336(7650):924-6. PMC: 2335261. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.39489.470347.AD. View

14.

Crepaz N, Tungol-Ashmon M, Higa D, Vosburgh W, Mullins M, Barham T . A systematic review of interventions for reducing HIV risk behaviors among people living with HIV in the United States, 1988-2012. AIDS. 2014; 28(5):633-56. PMC: 4678954. DOI: 10.1097/QAD.0000000000000108. View

15.

Tricco A, Antony J, Zarin W, Strifler L, Ghassemi M, Ivory J . A scoping review of rapid review methods. BMC Med. 2015; 13:224. PMC: 4574114. DOI: 10.1186/s12916-015-0465-6. View

16.

Simoni J, Nelson K, Franks J, Yard S, Lehavot K . Are peer interventions for HIV efficacious? A systematic review. AIDS Behav. 2011; 15(8):1589-95. PMC: 3607378. DOI: 10.1007/s10461-011-9963-5. View

17.

Nicola M, Alsafi Z, Sohrabi C, Kerwan A, Al-Jabir A, Iosifidis C . The socio-economic implications of the coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19): A review. Int J Surg. 2020; 78:185-193. PMC: 7162753. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2020.04.018. View

18.

Sloane B, Zimmer C . The power of peer health education. J Am Coll Health. 1993; 41(6):241-5. DOI: 10.1080/07448481.1993.9936334. View

19.

Jarrett C, Wilson R, OLeary M, Eckersberger E, Larson H . Strategies for addressing vaccine hesitancy - A systematic review. Vaccine. 2015; 33(34):4180-90. DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.04.040. View

20.

Fischhoff B, Bostrom A, Quadrel M . Risk perception and communication. Annu Rev Public Health. 1993; 14:183-203. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.pu.14.050193.001151. View