Search for: All records

Abstract BackgroundWildfire smoke contributes substantially to the global disease burden and is a major cause of air pollution in the US states of Oregon and Washington. Climate change is expected to bring more wildfires to this region. Social media is a popular platform for health promotion and a need exists for effective communication about smoke risks and mitigation measures to educate citizens and safeguard public health. MethodsUsing a sample of 1,287 Tweets from 2022, we aimed to analyze temporal Tweeting patterns in relation to potential smoke exposure and evaluate and compare institutions’ use of social media communication best practices which include (i) encouraging adoption of smoke-protective actions; (ii) leveraging numeric, verbal, and Air Quality Index risk information; and (iii) promoting community-building. Tweets were characterized using keyword searches and the Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC) software. Descriptive and inferential statistics were carried out. Results44% of Tweets in our sample were authored between January-August 2022, prior to peak wildfire smoke levels, whereas 54% of Tweets were authored during the two-month peak in smoke (September-October). Institutional accounts used Twitter (or X) to encourage the adoption of smoke-related protective actions (82% of Tweets), more than they used it to disseminate wildfire smoke risk information (25%) or promote community-building (47%). Only 10% of Tweets discussed populations vulnerable to wildfire smoke health effects, and 14% mentioned smoke mitigation measures. Tweets from Washington-based accounts used significantly more verbal and numeric risk information to discuss wildfire smoke than Oregon-based accounts (p = 0.042 andp = 0.003, respectively); however, Tweets from Oregon-based accounts on average contained a higher percentage of words associated with community-building language (p < 0.001). ConclusionsThis research provides practical recommendations for public health practitioners and researchers communicating wildfire smoke risks on social media. As exposures to wildfire smoke rise due to climate change, reducing the environmental disease burden requires health officials to leverage popular communication platforms, distribute necessary health-related messaging rapidly, and get the message right. Timely, evidence-based, and theory-driven messaging is critical for educating and empowering individuals to make informed decisions about protecting themselves from harmful exposures. Thus, proactive and sustained communications about wildfire smoke should be prioritized even during wildfire “off-seasons.” 

Abstract Background. Wildfire smoke events are increasing in frequency and intensity due to climate change. Children are especially vulnerable to health effects even at moderate smoke levels. However, it is unclear how parents respond to Air Quality Indices (AQIs) frequently used by agencies to communicate air pollution health risks.Methods. In an experiment (3 × 2 × 2 factorial design), 2,100 parents were randomly assigned to view one of twelve adapted AQI infographics that varied by visual (table, line, gauge), index type (AQI [0-500], AQHI [1-11+]), and risk level (moderate, high). Participants were told to imagine encountering the infographic in a short-term exposure scenario. They reported worry about wildfire smoke, intentions to take risk-mitigating actions (e.g., air purifier use), and support for various exposure reduction policies. Subsequently, participants were told to imagine encountering the same infographic daily during a school week in a long-term exposure scenario and again reported worry, action intentions, and policy support.Results. Parents’ responses significantly differentiated between risk levels that both pose a threat to children’s health; worry and action intentions were much higher in the high-risk group than the moderate-risk group in both short-exposure (F = 748.68 p<.001; F = 411.59, p<.001) and long-exposure scenarios (F = 470.51, p<.001; F = 212.01, p<.001). However, in the short-exposure scenario, when shown the AQHI [1-11+] with either the line or gauge visuals, parents’ action intentions were more similar between moderate- and high-risk level groups (3-way interaction, F = 6.03, p = .002).Conclusions. These results suggest some index formats such as the AQHI—rather than the AQI—may better attune parents to moderate levels of wildfire smoke being dangerous to children’s health. Our research offers insights for agencies and officials seeking to improve current public education efforts during wildfire smoke events and speaks to the critical need to educate parents and help them act short-term and long-term to protect children’s health. 

Abstract Scientific evidence regularly guides policy decisions¹, with behavioural science increasingly part of this process². In April 2020, an influential paper³proposed 19 policy recommendations (‘claims’) detailing how evidence from behavioural science could contribute to efforts to reduce impacts and end the COVID-19 pandemic. Here we assess 747 pandemic-related research articles that empirically investigated those claims. We report the scale of evidence and whether evidence supports them to indicate applicability for policymaking. Two independent teams, involving 72 reviewers, found evidence for 18 of 19 claims, with both teams finding evidence supporting 16 (89%) of those 18 claims. The strongest evidence supported claims that anticipated culture, polarization and misinformation would be associated with policy effectiveness. Claims suggesting trusted leaders and positive social norms increased adherence to behavioural interventions also had strong empirical support, as did appealing to social consensus or bipartisan agreement. Targeted language in messaging yielded mixed effects and there were no effects for highlighting individual benefits or protecting others. No available evidence existed to assess any distinct differences in effects between using the terms ‘physical distancing’ and ‘social distancing’. Analysis of 463 papers containing data showed generally large samples; 418 involved human participants with a mean of 16,848 (median of 1,699). That statistical power underscored improved suitability of behavioural science research for informing policy decisions. Furthermore, by implementing a standardized approach to evidence selection and synthesis, we amplify broader implications for advancing scientific evidence in policy formulation and prioritization. 

Risk information is increasingly available to health care providers and patients thanks to a growing body of health outcomes research and clinical prediction models. Meanwhile, communicating such information is encouraged for a variety of reasons. Yet clinicians often struggle to communicate risk information—or forego the task altogether due to various challenges. The challenges are real, and this paper briefly discusses six of them: (1) Clinician reliance on verbal risk descriptions, (2) Low patient numeracy; (3) Lack of meaningful numeric evidence; (4) Patient use of heuristics; (5) Uncertain risk information; and (6) The curse of knowledge. Specific strategies exist for clinicians, though, to overcome these complex challenges. In the paper, we present evidence-based best practices with examples of what clinicians can do to effectively communicate risk information to their patients (and what they should not do). The best practices include communicating with numbers, not only words; decreasing cognitive effort for patients; providing the meaning of numeric risk data important to decisions; acknowledging uncertainty; and testing communication with patients through teach-back techniques. We conclude by recommending that clinicians integrate these strategies into their existing scripts for patient encounters.