Experiences of Governments and Public Health Agencies Regarding Crisis Communication During the COVID-19 Pandemic in the Digital Age: Protocol for a Systematic Review of Qualitative Studies

Overview

Journal JMIR Res Protoc

Publisher JMIR Publications

Specialty General Medicine

Date 2024 Jun 27

PMID 38935414

Authors

Tsuyoshi Okuhara

Marina Terada

Hiroko Okada

Takahiro Kiuchi

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Governments and public health agencies worldwide experienced difficulties with social media-mediated infodemics on the internet during the COVID-19 pandemic. Existing public health crisis communication strategies need to be updated. However, crisis communication experiences of governments and public health agencies worldwide during the COVID-19 pandemic have not been systematically compiled, necessitating updated crisis communication strategies.

Objective: This systematic review aims to collect and organize the crisis communication experiences of senders (ie, governments and public health agencies) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our focus is on exploring the difficulties that governments and public health agencies experienced, best practices in crisis communication by governments and public health agencies during the COVID-19 pandemic in times of infodemic, and challenges that should be overcome in future public health crises.

Methods: We plan to begin the literature search on May 1, 2024. We will search PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, Communication Abstracts, and Web of Science. We will filter our database searches to search from the year 2020 and beyond. We will use a combination of keywords by referring to the SPIDER (Sample, Phenomenon of Interest, Design, Evaluation, and Research type) tool to search the abstracts in databases. We intend to include qualitative studies on crisis communication by governments and public health agencies (eg, officials, staff, health professionals, and researchers) to the public. Quantitative data-based studies will be excluded. Only papers written in English will be included. Data on study characteristics, study aim, participant characteristics, methodology, theoretical framework, object of crisis communication, and key results will be extracted. The methodological quality of eligible studies will be assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklist for qualitative research. A total of 2 independent reviewers will share responsibility for screening publications, data extraction, and quality assessment. Disagreement will be resolved through discussion, and the third reviewer will be consulted, if necessary. The findings will be summarized in a table and a conceptual diagram and synthesized in a descriptive and narrative review.

Results: The results will be systematically integrated and presented in a way that corresponds to our research objectives and interests. We expect the results of this review to be submitted for publication by the end of 2024.

Conclusions: To our knowledge, this will be the first systematic review of the experiences of governments and public health agencies regarding their crisis communication to the public during the COVID-19 pandemic. This review will contribute to the future improvement of the guidelines for crisis communication by governments and public health agencies to the public.

Trial Registration: PROSPERO CRD42024528975; https://tinyurl.com/4fjmd8te.

International Registered Report Identifier (irrid): PRR1-10.2196/58040.

References

van der Linden S . Misinformation: susceptibility, spread, and interventions to immunize the public. Nat Med. 2022; 28(3):460-467. DOI: 10.1038/s41591-022-01713-6. View

Al-Aghbari A, Hassan O, Dar Iang M, Jahn A, Horstick O, Dureab F . Exploring the Role of Infodemics in People's Incompliance with Preventive Measures during the COVID-19 in Conflict Settings (Mixed Method Study). Healthcare (Basel). 2023; 11(7). PMC: 10093864. DOI: 10.3390/healthcare11070952. View

Choukou M, Sanchez-Ramirez D, Pol M, Uddin M, Monnin C, Syed-Abdul S . COVID-19 infodemic and digital health literacy in vulnerable populations: A scoping review. Digit Health. 2022; 8:20552076221076927. PMC: 8874333. DOI: 10.1177/20552076221076927. View

Xia S, Nan X . Motivating COVID-19 Vaccination through Persuasive Communication: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials. Health Commun. 2023; 39(8):1455-1478. DOI: 10.1080/10410236.2023.2218145. View

Wang Y, Mckee M, Torbica A, Stuckler D . Systematic Literature Review on the Spread of Health-related Misinformation on Social Media. Soc Sci Med. 2019; 240:112552. PMC: 7117034. DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.112552. View

Porat T, Nyrup R, Calvo R, Paudyal P, Ford E . Public Health and Risk Communication During COVID-19-Enhancing Psychological Needs to Promote Sustainable Behavior Change. Front Public Health. 2020; 8:573397. PMC: 7652763. DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2020.573397. View

Atighechian G, Rezaei F, Tavakoli N, Abarghoian M . Information challenges of COVID-19: A qualitative research. J Educ Health Promot. 2021; 10:279. PMC: 8395891. DOI: 10.4103/jehp.jehp_1271_20. View

Sandhu S, Wilson E, Chattopadhyay K . Perceptions and Experiences of Undergraduate Students Regarding Social Media as a Tool for Government COVID-19-Related Messages: A Qualitative Study in Nottingham, UK. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023; 20(20). PMC: 10606761. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph20206903. View

Page M, McKenzie J, Bossuyt P, Boutron I, Hoffmann T, Mulrow C . The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021; 372:n71. PMC: 8005924. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.n71. View

10.

Prike T, Ecker U . Effective correction of misinformation. Curr Opin Psychol. 2023; 54:101712. DOI: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2023.101712. View

11.

Reynolds B, Seeger M . Crisis and emergency risk communication as an integrative model. J Health Commun. 2005; 10(1):43-55. DOI: 10.1080/10810730590904571. View

12.

Takamura N, Orita M, Taira Y, Matsunaga H, Yamashita S . Experiences of crisis communication during radiation emergency and risk communication for recovery of the community in Fukushima. J Radiat Res. 2021; 62(Supplement_1):i95-i100. PMC: 8114217. DOI: 10.1093/jrr/rraa113. View

13.

Briand S, Cinelli M, Nguyen T, Lewis R, Prybylski D, Valensise C . Infodemics: A new challenge for public health. Cell. 2021; 184(25):6010-6014. PMC: 8656270. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2021.10.031. View

14.

Cooke A, Smith D, Booth A . Beyond PICO: the SPIDER tool for qualitative evidence synthesis. Qual Health Res. 2012; 22(10):1435-43. DOI: 10.1177/1049732312452938. View

15.

Quinn P . Crisis Communication in Public Health Emergencies: The Limits of 'Legal Control' and the Risks for Harmful Outcomes in a Digital Age. Life Sci Soc Policy. 2018; 14(1):4. PMC: 5799154. DOI: 10.1186/s40504-018-0067-0. View

16.

Suarez-Lledo V, Alvarez-Galvez J . Prevalence of Health Misinformation on Social Media: Systematic Review. J Med Internet Res. 2021; 23(1):e17187. PMC: 7857950. DOI: 10.2196/17187. View

17.

Whitehead H, French C, Caldwell D, Letley L, Mounier-Jack S . A systematic review of communication interventions for countering vaccine misinformation. Vaccine. 2023; 41(5):1018-1034. PMC: 9829031. DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2022.12.059. View

18.

Thomas J, Harden A . Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2008; 8:45. PMC: 2478656. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-8-45. View

19.

Winters M, Jalloh M, Sengeh P, Jalloh M, Conteh L, Bunnell R . Risk Communication and Ebola-Specific Knowledge and Behavior during 2014-2015 Outbreak, Sierra Leone. Emerg Infect Dis. 2018; 24(2):336-344. PMC: 5782897. DOI: 10.3201/eid2402.171028. View

20.

Eckert S, Sopory P, Day A, Wilkins L, Padgett D, Novak J . Health-Related Disaster Communication and Social Media: Mixed-Method Systematic Review. Health Commun. 2017; 33(12):1389-1400. DOI: 10.1080/10410236.2017.1351278. View