A Qualitative Content Analysis of Responses to CDC's Foodborne Outbreak Messages on Facebook.

Q4 Medicine Food Protection Trends Pub Date : 2022-05-01 DOI:10.4315/fpt-21-028
Michael Ablan, Mary Pomeroy, Neha Jaggi Sood, Katherine E Marshall
{"title":"A Qualitative Content Analysis of Responses to CDC's Foodborne Outbreak Messages on Facebook.","authors":"Michael Ablan,&nbsp;Mary Pomeroy,&nbsp;Neha Jaggi Sood,&nbsp;Katherine E Marshall","doi":"10.4315/fpt-21-028","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) coordinates investigations of multistate foodborne outbreaks. To better inform future communication efforts with the public during these outbreaks, we conducted a qualitative content analysis of comments on multistate foodborne outbreak Facebook posts distributed on the CDC's Facebook page September to December 2018. The CDC created 27 Facebook posts for nine multistate foodborne outbreaks (one to eight posts per outbreak), and 2,612 comments were analyzed. The CDC used two Web tools to deliver outbreak information: food safety alerts (FSAs) and investigation notices (INs). Qualitative analyses were conducted separately for Facebook posts resulting from FSAs and INs. Using an inductive coding approach, we identified nine categories of comments: information sharing (e.g., tagging others), actions (e.g., discarding contaminated food), convictions and beliefs (e.g., food-related preconceived notions), questions (e.g., clarifying outbreak location), emotional responses (e.g., worry), blame (e.g., responsibility for outbreak), food specific (e.g., repackaging ground beef and losing identifying information), promoting another cause (e.g., vaccine hesitancy), and unrelated. No differences were found between FSAs and INs. Facebook users helped further disseminate important outbreak information but identified barriers that prevented them from taking recommended actions. Real-time evaluation of social media during outbreaks provides opportunities to refine messaging and improve communication.</p>","PeriodicalId":38649,"journal":{"name":"Food Protection Trends","volume":"42 3","pages":"174-185"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10174219/pdf/nihms-1852387.pdf","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Food Protection Trends","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4315/fpt-21-028","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) coordinates investigations of multistate foodborne outbreaks. To better inform future communication efforts with the public during these outbreaks, we conducted a qualitative content analysis of comments on multistate foodborne outbreak Facebook posts distributed on the CDC's Facebook page September to December 2018. The CDC created 27 Facebook posts for nine multistate foodborne outbreaks (one to eight posts per outbreak), and 2,612 comments were analyzed. The CDC used two Web tools to deliver outbreak information: food safety alerts (FSAs) and investigation notices (INs). Qualitative analyses were conducted separately for Facebook posts resulting from FSAs and INs. Using an inductive coding approach, we identified nine categories of comments: information sharing (e.g., tagging others), actions (e.g., discarding contaminated food), convictions and beliefs (e.g., food-related preconceived notions), questions (e.g., clarifying outbreak location), emotional responses (e.g., worry), blame (e.g., responsibility for outbreak), food specific (e.g., repackaging ground beef and losing identifying information), promoting another cause (e.g., vaccine hesitancy), and unrelated. No differences were found between FSAs and INs. Facebook users helped further disseminate important outbreak information but identified barriers that prevented them from taking recommended actions. Real-time evaluation of social media during outbreaks provides opportunities to refine messaging and improve communication.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对美国疾病控制与预防中心在Facebook上发布的食源性疾病爆发消息的回应进行定性内容分析。
疾病控制和预防中心(CDC)协调多州食源性疫情的调查。为了更好地为未来疫情期间与公众的沟通提供信息,我们对2018年9月至12月CDC Facebook页面上发布的多州食源性疫情Facebook帖子的评论进行了定性内容分析。疾病预防控制中心为9个多州食源性疾病爆发(每次爆发1到8个帖子)创建了27个Facebook帖子,并分析了2612条评论。疾病控制与预防中心使用两种网络工具来发布疫情信息:食品安全警报(FSAs)和调查通知(INs)。分别对fsa和INs产生的Facebook帖子进行定性分析。使用归纳编码方法,我们确定了九类注释:信息共享(例如,标记他人)、行动(例如,丢弃受污染的食品)、信念和信念(例如,与食品有关的先入为主的观念)、问题(例如,澄清疫情地点)、情绪反应(例如,担忧)、指责(例如,对疫情的责任)、特定食品(例如,重新包装碎牛肉和丢失识别信息)、促进另一个原因(例如,疫苗犹豫)和不相关。在fsa和INs之间没有发现差异。Facebook用户帮助进一步传播重要的疫情信息,但发现了阻碍他们采取建议行动的障碍。疫情爆发期间对社交媒体的实时评估为改进信息传递和改善沟通提供了机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Food Protection Trends
Food Protection Trends Agricultural and Biological Sciences-Food Science
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
期刊最新文献
Examining Age and Food Irradiation Knowledge as Influential Factors on Purchase of Irradiated Foods - United States, August 2022. Focus Groups Exploring U.S. Adults' Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices Related to Irradiation as a Food Safety Intervention, 2021. Evaluating Misinformation on YouTube about Washing Produce Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemi Minimally Processed Vegetables: Consumer Profile, Consumption Habits, and Perceptions of Microbiological Risk Perceptions of Risk, Control, and Responsibility Regarding Food Safety among Consumers in Lebanon
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1