Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36839618›Full record

ArticlePathogens (Basel, Switzerland)2023

COVID-19, Framing and Naming a Pandemic: How What Is Not in a Disease Name May Be More Important than What Is.

T S Harvey

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

T S HarveyDepartment of Anthropology, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37240, USA.
Vanderbilt University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While the disease name and acronym COVID-19, where 'CO' refers to 'corona', 'VI' to virus, 'D' to disease, and '19' the detection year, represents a rational, historically informed, and even culturally sensitive name choice by the World Health Organization, from the perspective of an ethnography of disease framing and naming, this study finds that it does not, however, readily communicate a public health message. This observation, based on linguistic and medical anthropological research and analyses, raises a critically important question: Can or should official disease names, beyond labeling medical conditions, also be designed to function as public health messages? As the ethnography of the term COVID-19 and its 'framing' demonstrates, using acronyms for disease names in public health can not only reduce their intelligibility but may also lower emerging public perceptions of risk, inadvertently, increasing the public's vulnerability. This study argues that the ongoing messaging and communication challenges surrounding the framing of COVID-19 and its variants represent an important opportunity for public health to engage social science research on language and risk communication to critically rethink disease naming and framing and how what they are called can prefigure and inform the public's uptake of science, understandings of risk, and the perceived importance of public health guidelines.

Indexed as

COVID-19disease namingpublic healthrisk communication

Identifiers

PMID36839618
PMCPMC9961926
OpenAlexW4321374280

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.