ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
Lessons learned: enhancing rural risk communication for future health crises through the PHERCC framework.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- H5N1 preparedness must integrate rural and agricultural realities.Lancet regional health. Americas · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Public health emergencies, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, highlight the critical role of effective risk communication in managing crises. The Public Health Emergency Risk and Crisis Communication framework (PHERCC) provides a structured approach to crafting, delivering, and refining public health messages to build trust, promote compliance, and enhance societal resilience. Methods: This qualitative study examined COVID-19 risk communication strategies in rural Northern New England using the PHERCC framework. Data were collected through seventeen stakeholder interviews, seven focus groups, and a pilot study conducted between November 2022 and March 2023. Stakeholders represented state and local organizations, while focus group participants included rural residents. A thematic analysis using NVivo software aligned findings with the six PHERCC domains: Evidence, Initiator, Channel, Publics, Message, and Feedback. Results: Stakeholders emphasized transparency in public health messaging, adapting to evolving evidence while maintaining consistency. Trusted local sources and traditional media were essential for reaching vulnerable populations, particularly older adults in rural areas. Public feedback highlighted barriers such as misinformation, translation challenges, and limited internet access. The pilot study confirmed that community collaboration and tailored messaging increased understanding and trust among rural residents. Simplified accessible core messages and consistent updates further enhanced public engagement. Conclusion: This study shows the importance of evidence-based, adaptive, and population subgroup sensitive communication during public health emergencies. The PHERCC framework proved instrumental in addressing challenges, promoting trust, and refining strategies. Investing in inclusive communication systems and leveraging community partnerships are important for effective responses to future health crises.
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.