ArticleThe American journal of bioethics : AJOB2024
The PHERCC Matrix. An Ethical Framework for Planning, Governing, and Evaluating Risk and Crisis Communication in the Context of Public Health Emergencies.
Article in The American journal of bioethics : AJOB, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- How do policy tool combinations drive the construction of public health technology R&D alliances?Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Why ethics in social listening and infodemic management matters for public health.BMJ public health · 2026Article
- Reason and responsibility as a path toward ethical AI for (global) public health.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Review
- Lessons learned: enhancing rural risk communication for future health crises through the PHERCC framework.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Introducing Preference Epidemiology: Improving Patient-Centered Approaches in Health Decision-Making.International journal of public health · 2025Article
- Ethical Considerations in Infodemic Management: Systematic Scoping Review.JMIR infodemiology · 2024Article
- Disruptive Technologies and Open Science: How Open Should Open Science Be? A 'Third Bioethics' Ethical Framework.Science and engineering ethics · 2024Article
- Beyond Trade-Offs: Autonomy, Effectiveness, Fairness, and Normativity in Risk and Crisis Communication.The American journal of bioethics : AJOB · 2024Article
- Digital Democracy and Emergency Preparedness: Engaging the Public in Public Health.International journal of public health · 2024Article
- How to counter the anti-vaccine rhetoric: Filling information voids and building resilience.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2022Article
- WHO and digital agencies: how to effectively tackle COVID-19 misinformation online.BMJ global health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Risk and crisis communication (RCC) is a current ethical issue subject to controversy, mainly due to the tension between individual liberty (a core component of fairness) and effectiveness. In this paper we propose a consistent definition of the RCC process in public health emergencies (PHERCC), which comprises six key elements: evidence, initiator, channel, publics, message, and feedback. Based on these elements and on a detailed analysis of their role in PHERCC, we present an ethical framework to help design, govern and evaluate PHERCC strategies. The framework aims to facilitate RCC, incorporating effectiveness, autonomy, and fairness. It comprises five operational ethical principles: openness, transparency, inclusivity, understandability, and privacy. The resulting matrix helps understanding the interplay between the PHERCC process and the principles of the framework. The paper includes suggestions and recommendations for the implementation of the PHERCC matrix.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37114888What 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.