ArticleJMIR human factors2023
Eliciting Opinions on Health Messaging During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Qualitative Survey Study.
Article in JMIR human factors, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of scalable, wordless, short, animated storytelling videos on hope in China: a nationwide, single-blind, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial.Journal of global health · 2025Trial
- "As soon as it's trying to be persuasive, my skepticism kicks in": A qualitative study to co-design vaccine communication strategies with vaccine hesitant adults in Canada.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2026Article
- Chronic Conditions and Adherence to COVID-19 Preventive Measures in Pitt County, North Carolina.AJPM focus · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEffective public health messaging has been necessary throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, but stakeholders have struggled to communicate critical information to the public, especially in different types of locations such as urban and rural areas.
objectiveThis study aimed to identify opportunities to improve COVID-19 messages for community distribution in rural and urban settings and to summarize the findings to inform future messaging.
methodsWe purposively sampled by region (urban or rural) and participant type (general public or health care professional) to survey participants about their opinions on 4 COVID-19 health messages. We designed open-ended survey questions and analyzed the data using pragmatic health equity implementation science approaches. Following the qualitative analysis of the survey responses, we designed refined COVID-19 messages incorporating participant feedback and redistributed them via a short survey.
resultsIn total, 67 participants consented and enrolled: 31 (46%) community participants from the rural Southeast Missouri Bootheel, 27 (40%) community participants from urban St Louis, and 9 (13%) health care professionals from St Louis. Overall, we found no qualitative differences between the responses of our urban and rural samples to the open-ended questions. Participants across groups wanted familiar COVID-19 protocols, personal choice in COVID-19 preventive behaviors, and clear source information. Health care professionals contextualized their suggestions within the specific needs of their patients. All groups suggested practices consistent with health-literate communications. We reached 83% (54/65) of the participants for message redistribution, and most had overwhelmingly positive responses to the refined messages.
conclusionsWe suggest convenient methods for community involvement in the creation of health messages by using a brief web-based survey. We identified areas of improvement for future health messaging, such as reaffirming the preventive practices advertised early in a crisis, framing messages such that they allow for personal choice of preventive behavior, highlighting well-known source information, using plain language, and crafting messages that are applicable to the readers' circumstances.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.