Cargando…

Assessing the state of Web-based communication for public health: a systematic review

BACKGROUND: Communicating strategically is a key issue for health organisations and, over the past decade, healthcare communication via social media and websites has generated a great deal of studies. As for systematic reviews, there is, however, fragmentary evidence on this type of communication. T...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ceretti, E, Covolo, L, Cappellini, F, Nanni, A, Sorosina, S, Taranto, M, Gasparini, A, Castro, P De, Brusaferro, S, Gelatti, U
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9593426/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckac130.056
_version_ 1784815156913504256
author Ceretti, E
Covolo, L
Cappellini, F
Nanni, A
Sorosina, S
Taranto, M
Gasparini, A
Castro, P De
Brusaferro, S
Gelatti, U
author_facet Ceretti, E
Covolo, L
Cappellini, F
Nanni, A
Sorosina, S
Taranto, M
Gasparini, A
Castro, P De
Brusaferro, S
Gelatti, U
author_sort Ceretti, E
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Communicating strategically is a key issue for health organisations and, over the past decade, healthcare communication via social media and websites has generated a great deal of studies. As for systematic reviews, there is, however, fragmentary evidence on this type of communication. The aim of this research was to summarise the evidence on Web institutional health communication for public health authorities to evaluate aim-specific key points based on existing studies. METHODS: Guided by the PRISMA statement, we conducted a comprehensive review across two electronic databases (PubMed and Web of Science) from 2011 until 7 October 2021, searching for studies investigating institutional health communication. Two independent researchers reviewed the articles for inclusion, and assessment of methodological quality was based on the Kmet appraisal checklist. RESULTS: 78 articles were selected. Most of the studies targeted health promotion/disease prevention (n = 35), followed by crisis communication (n = 24), general health (n = 13), and misinformation correction/health promotion (n = 6). Engagement and message framing were the most analysed aspects. Few studies focused on campaign effectiveness. Only 18 studies had an experimental design. Kmet evaluation was used to distinguish studies presenting a solid structure from lacking studies. In particular, considering the 0·75-point threshold, out of 74 studies, 28 were excluded (37·8% of the total). Studies above this threshold were used to identify a series of aim-specific and medium-specific suggestions, as communication strategies employed differ quite greatly. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, findings suggest that no single strategy works best in the case of Web-based healthcare communication. The extreme variability of outcomes and the lack of a unitary measure for assessing the end-points of a specific campaign or study leads us to reconsider the tools we use to evaluate the efficacy of Web-based health communication. KEY MESSAGES: This systematic review provides an overview on Web-based health communication. Results suggest that no single strategy works best and the need to reassess its evaluation tools. Communicating strategically is key for health organisations. This systematic review analyses a corpus of texts, in an effort to summarise and analyse existing, albeit fragmentary, evidence.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9593426
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95934262022-11-22 Assessing the state of Web-based communication for public health: a systematic review Ceretti, E Covolo, L Cappellini, F Nanni, A Sorosina, S Taranto, M Gasparini, A Castro, P De Brusaferro, S Gelatti, U Eur J Public Health Poster Walks BACKGROUND: Communicating strategically is a key issue for health organisations and, over the past decade, healthcare communication via social media and websites has generated a great deal of studies. As for systematic reviews, there is, however, fragmentary evidence on this type of communication. The aim of this research was to summarise the evidence on Web institutional health communication for public health authorities to evaluate aim-specific key points based on existing studies. METHODS: Guided by the PRISMA statement, we conducted a comprehensive review across two electronic databases (PubMed and Web of Science) from 2011 until 7 October 2021, searching for studies investigating institutional health communication. Two independent researchers reviewed the articles for inclusion, and assessment of methodological quality was based on the Kmet appraisal checklist. RESULTS: 78 articles were selected. Most of the studies targeted health promotion/disease prevention (n = 35), followed by crisis communication (n = 24), general health (n = 13), and misinformation correction/health promotion (n = 6). Engagement and message framing were the most analysed aspects. Few studies focused on campaign effectiveness. Only 18 studies had an experimental design. Kmet evaluation was used to distinguish studies presenting a solid structure from lacking studies. In particular, considering the 0·75-point threshold, out of 74 studies, 28 were excluded (37·8% of the total). Studies above this threshold were used to identify a series of aim-specific and medium-specific suggestions, as communication strategies employed differ quite greatly. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, findings suggest that no single strategy works best in the case of Web-based healthcare communication. The extreme variability of outcomes and the lack of a unitary measure for assessing the end-points of a specific campaign or study leads us to reconsider the tools we use to evaluate the efficacy of Web-based health communication. KEY MESSAGES: This systematic review provides an overview on Web-based health communication. Results suggest that no single strategy works best and the need to reassess its evaluation tools. Communicating strategically is key for health organisations. This systematic review analyses a corpus of texts, in an effort to summarise and analyse existing, albeit fragmentary, evidence. Oxford University Press 2022-10-25 /pmc/articles/PMC9593426/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckac130.056 Text en © The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Public Health Association. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Poster Walks
Ceretti, E
Covolo, L
Cappellini, F
Nanni, A
Sorosina, S
Taranto, M
Gasparini, A
Castro, P De
Brusaferro, S
Gelatti, U
Assessing the state of Web-based communication for public health: a systematic review
title Assessing the state of Web-based communication for public health: a systematic review
title_full Assessing the state of Web-based communication for public health: a systematic review
title_fullStr Assessing the state of Web-based communication for public health: a systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Assessing the state of Web-based communication for public health: a systematic review
title_short Assessing the state of Web-based communication for public health: a systematic review
title_sort assessing the state of web-based communication for public health: a systematic review
topic Poster Walks
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9593426/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckac130.056
work_keys_str_mv AT cerettie assessingthestateofwebbasedcommunicationforpublichealthasystematicreview
AT covolol assessingthestateofwebbasedcommunicationforpublichealthasystematicreview
AT cappellinif assessingthestateofwebbasedcommunicationforpublichealthasystematicreview
AT nannia assessingthestateofwebbasedcommunicationforpublichealthasystematicreview
AT sorosinas assessingthestateofwebbasedcommunicationforpublichealthasystematicreview
AT tarantom assessingthestateofwebbasedcommunicationforpublichealthasystematicreview
AT gasparinia assessingthestateofwebbasedcommunicationforpublichealthasystematicreview
AT castropde assessingthestateofwebbasedcommunicationforpublichealthasystematicreview
AT brusaferros assessingthestateofwebbasedcommunicationforpublichealthasystematicreview
AT gelattiu assessingthestateofwebbasedcommunicationforpublichealthasystematicreview