Dataset Information

C-A3-03: Media Messages About Cancer: What Do People Understand?

ABSTRACT: Background: The importance of print health literacy is widely recognized, but oral literacy has been largely ignored. Because much health information is conveyed via spoken word, an inaccurate or incomplete comprehension of spoken health messages may have important consequences. This study explored the extent to which listeners understood critical concepts in spoken messages about cancer prevention and screening.Methods: Forty-four adults from three health plans took part in a 1-hour interview. Participants viewed six brief media clips from TV or the Web about cancer prevention and screening. Each clip contained multiple messages. Participants paraphrased the clips? main points and key concepts. We coded the accuracy of participants? responses with respect to the message content.Results: Of 44 participants, aged 41 to 70, 52% were female; 48% were non-white; and 5% had a high school education or less. Messages were generally understood by most participants but some participants misunderstood critical cancer prevention concepts. Nine of 44 could not define the term ?at risk.? Others provided approximately accurate synonyms, such as ?susceptible to,? or ?inclined to,? or gave examples of risk factors (e.g. fair skin for skin cancer) that indicated a partial understanding of the concept. In response to a news report about a comprehensive cancer study synthesizing the results of 7,000 clinical trials, 10% of the participants viewed the study size as small, or mistook the number of trials for number of patients. Some participants had trouble distinguishing ?screening? and ?prevention,? apparently believing that screening is inherently preventive.Conclusions: Most participants in this sample of moderately to well-educated adults understood the main points contained in spoken messages about cancer screening and prevention. However, important concepts such as ?at risk? (applicable to conditions besides cancer), were sometimes misunderstood. Similarly, some participants had difficulty understanding the strength of research evidence and the value of multiple studies. Comprehension depends on foundational knowledge, which even educated lay people may be missing. Speakers, whether news anchors or providers?cannot assume that listeners understand critical health concepts even if the words themselves seem simple.

SUBMITTER: Mazor K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2842424 | biostudies-other | 2010 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionDespite the potential of social media to influence public health and generate insights, the process of monitoring and analyzing the dissemination of health care messages on social media has been described as difficult and in need of improvement.ObjectivesThe objective of this study was to describe and demonstrate a reproducible methodology for cataloging and analyzing health care-related social media comments and provide insight into how clinicians and members of the general public respond to health care messaging on social media.MethodsWe collected social media comments related to the American Dental Association's 2016 "Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guideline for the Use of Pit-and-Fissure Sealants" between April 10, 2017, and October 31, 2017, from Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Reddit, and online message boards for the New York Times, FiveThirtyEight, and Dentaltown. Using data provided in the comments, we conducted engagement analysis as well as content, network, and sentiment analysis across 8 categories.ResultsWe collected 671 comments. Among our findings, Facebook (472 of 671) was the most popular platform among commentators; almost half of all comments (335 of 671) aligned with the recommendations of the 2016 American Dental Association sealants guideline; clinicians were more likely than the general public to like a comment that suggested an improvement to the guideline; and >75% of comments (521 of 671) were supported by anecdotal evidence.ConclusionAs the prevalence of anecdotes on social media suggests, the likelihood of falsehoods spreading on social media is high. Insights gleaned from the methodology described in this research could help combat the spread of such misinformation by providing disseminators of health care messaging with insight into their target audiences. Armed with this knowledge, disseminators can craft health care messages that more effectively engage clinicians and the general public.Knowledge transfer statementThe methodology used in this research provides a reproducible strategy for tracking social media engagement with health care messages. Engagement results can assist future delivery of health care messages to key stakeholders and ensure better implementation and adoption of these communications.

Project description:BackgroundSocial media is increasingly being used by young people for health-related issues, including communicating about suicide. Due to the concerns about causing distress or inducing suicidal thoughts or behaviors, to date young people neither have been engaged in the development of social media-based suicide prevention interventions nor have interventions focused on educating young people about safe ways to communicate about suicide online. Given the potential that social media holds to deliver messages to vast numbers of people across space and time and the fact that young people often prefer to seek help from their friends and peers, safely educating and engaging young people to develop suicide prevention messages that can be delivered via social media is an obvious next step.ObjectivesThe objectives of this study were to (1) provide education to a small number of secondary school students about safe ways to communicate about suicide via social media; (2) engage the same young people in the development of a suite of social media-based suicide prevention multimedia messages; (3) assess the impact of this on participants; and (4) assess the acceptability and safety of the messages developed.MethodsThis study involved two phases. In phase 1, 20 participants recruited from two schools took part in an 8- to 10-week program during which they were provided with psychoeducation about mental health and suicide, including how to talk safely about suicide online, and they were then supported to design and develop their own media messages. These participants completed an evaluation questionnaire at the conclusion of the program. In phase 2, a larger group of participants (n=69), recruited via an opt-in process, viewed the media messages and completed a short questionnaire about each one.ResultsParticipants in phase 1 enjoyed the program and reported that they learned new skills, such as how to talk safely about suicide online, and felt more able to provide emotional support to others (16/20, 80%). No participants reported that the program made them feel suicidal. Participants in phase 2 generally rated the media messages as safe and acceptable, although some messages were rated more highly than others.ConclusionsThis study suggests that young people can be safely engaged in developing suicide prevention messages, which can be disseminated via social media. Engaging young people in this process may improve the traction that such campaigns will have with other young people. The study also suggests that educating young people regarding how to talk safely about suicide online has multiple benefits and is not associated with distress. Overall, these findings pave the way for new approaches to prevent suicide among young people.

Project description:Background: The UK print and online media is an important channel by which scientific research is communicated to the public. Media risk messages relating to pregnancy or fertility contribute to the context of reproductive decision making, but their fidelity to the underlying science has been questioned. Method: We measured the volume, distribution and content of science-based risk headlines relating to pregnancy or fertility in the UK media over four months. We grouped headlines into unique stories and categorised them by exposure and outcome of interest. We selected four unique stories for closer content analysis and assessed their fidelity to the underlying science, with attention to the role of press releases. Results: We identified 171 headlines over four months (average 43 per month), comprising 56 unique stories. The unique stories most commonly concerned maternal risk factors (n=46) and child health outcomes (n=46). Maternal health outcomes were less frequently the focus (n=20). The most common risk factors in the media coverage were maternal food and drink (n=15), maternal medication and medical interventions (n=9), and maternal health factors (n=6). Media reports were largely faithful to press releases. Where substantive deviations from the underlying scientific study were identified, these could mostly be traced back to press releases or quotes from the study's authors. Press releases often omitted caveats which were reinstated at the media reporting stage, alongside additional expert criticism. Conclusions: Frequent science-based risk messages in the UK media frame mothers as vectors of potential harm to children, who are the focus of health outcomes. Largely, the media does not introduce misinformation, but reports press releases faithfully with additional caveats and expert commentary. Press releases fulfil an interpretative role, often omitting caveats and introducing new elements and advice to women. Their role as a bridge between scientific and lay audiences is discussed.

Dataset Information

C-A3-03: Media Messages About Cancer: What Do People Understand?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets