Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35761365›Full record

ArticleGlobalization and health2022

A comparative analysis of experienced uncertainties in relation to risk communication during COVID19: a four-country study.

Florin Cristea, Heide Weishaar, Brogan Geurts, Alexandre Delamou, Melisa Mei Jin Tan, Helena Legido-Quigley, Kafayat Aminu, Almudena Mari-Sáez, Carlos Rocha, Bienvenu Camara and 9 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Globalization and health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
6.7field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

19 authors at 4 institutions in 6 countries.

Florin CristeaEvidence-Based Public Health Unit, Centre for International Health Protection, Robert Koch Institute, Nordufer 20, 13353, Berlin, Germany.
Heide WeishaarEvidence-Based Public Health Unit, Centre for International Health Protection, Robert Koch Institute, Nordufer 20, 13353, Berlin, Germany.
Brogan GeurtsEvidence-Based Public Health Unit, Centre for International Health Protection, Robert Koch Institute, Nordufer 20, 13353, Berlin, Germany.
Alexandre DelamouAfrican Center of Excellence for the Prevention and Control of Communicable Diseases & Centre de Formation et de Recherche en Santé Rurale de Maferinyah, PoBox 1017, Dixinn, Conakry, Guinea.
Melisa Mei Jin TanSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, 12 Science Drive 2, #10-01, Singapore, 117549, Singapore.
Helena Legido-QuigleySaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, 12 Science Drive 2, #10-01, Singapore, 117549, Singapore.
Kafayat AminuDepartment of Sociology, Faculty of the Social Sciences, University of Ibadan, 1, Oyo Road, Agbowo, Ibadan, Nigeria.
Almudena Mari-SáezCentre for International Health Protection, Robert Koch Institute, Nordufer 20, 13353, Berlin, Germany.
Carlos RochaCentre for International Health Protection, Robert Koch Institute, Nordufer 20, 13353, Berlin, Germany.
Bienvenu CamaraCentre de Formation et de Recherche en Santé Rurale de Maferinyah, Département de Recherche, Unité de Socio-Anthropologie, Conakry, Guinea.
Lansana BarryAfrican Center of Excellence for the Prevention and Control of Communicable Diseases, PoBox 1017, Dixinn, Conakry, Guinea.
Paul TheaAfrican Center of Excellence for the Prevention and Control of Communicable Diseases, PoBox 1017, Dixinn, Conakry, Guinea.
Johannes BoucseinDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Robert Koch Institute, Nordufer 20, 13353, Berlin, Germany.
Thurid BahrEvidence-Based Public Health Unit, Centre for International Health Protection, Robert Koch Institute, Nordufer 20, 13353, Berlin, Germany.
Sameh Al-AwlaqiEvidence-Based Public Health Unit, Centre for International Health Protection, Robert Koch Institute, Nordufer 20, 13353, Berlin, Germany.
Francisco Pozo-MartinEvidence-Based Public Health Unit, Centre for International Health Protection, Robert Koch Institute, Nordufer 20, 13353, Berlin, Germany.
Evgeniya BoklageHealth Information Centre for International Health Protection unit, Centre for International Health Protection, Robert Koch Institute, Nordufer 20, 13353, Berlin, Germany.
Ayodele Samuel JegedeDepartment of Sociology, Faculty of the Social Sciences, University of Ibadan, 1, Oyo Road, Agbowo, Ibadan, Nigeria.
Charbel El BcheraouiEvidence-Based Public Health Unit, Centre for International Health Protection, Robert Koch Institute, Nordufer 20, 13353, Berlin, Germany. El-BcheraouiC@rki.de.
Robert Koch Institute · DENational University of Singapore · SGUniversity of Ibadan · NGInstitut de Recherche Agronomique de Guinée · GN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDuring outbreaks, uncertainties experienced by affected communities can influence their compliance to government guidance on public health. Communicators and authorities are, hence, encouraged to acknowledge and address such uncertainties. However, in the midst of public health crises, it can become difficult to define and identify uncertainties that are most relevant to address. We analyzed data on COVID-19-related uncertainties from four socio-economic contexts to explore how uncertainties can influence people's perception of, and response to Risk Communication and Community Engagement (RCCE) strategies.

resultsThis qualitative study, which adopts an interpretative approach, is based on data from a documentary review, key informant interviews (KII), and focus group discussions (FGD) with members of the general public and people with barriers to information from Germany, Guinea, Nigeria, and Singapore. Transcripts from the KII and FGD were coded and analyzed thematically. We interviewed a total of 155 KIs and conducted 73 FGD. Our analysis uncovered a divergence between uncertainties deemed relevant by stakeholders involved in policy making and uncertainties that people reportedly had to navigate in their everyday lives and which they considered relevant during the pandemic. We identified four types of uncertainties that seemed to have influenced people's assessment of the disease risk and their trust in the pandemic control strategies including RCCE efforts: epidemiological uncertainties (related to the nature and severity of the virus), information uncertainties (related to access to reliable information), social uncertainties (related to social behavior in times of heightened risk), and economic uncertainties (related to financial insecurities).

conclusionWe suggest that in future outbreaks, communicators and policy makers could improve the way in which affected communities assess their risk, and increase the trust of these communities in response efforts by addressing non-epidemiological uncertainties in RCCE strategies.

Indexed as

COVID-19CommunicationDisease OutbreaksHumansPandemicsPublic HealthRisk assessmentRisk communication and community engagementTrustUncertainty

Identifiers

PMID35761365
PMCPMC9235152
OpenAlexW4283574857

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.