Journal of Health Communication最新文献

This study examined how message themes, frames, and sources in vaping cessation videos on TikTok influenced positive (i.e. likes, shares, positive comments regarding quitting vaping) and negative video engagement (i.e. negative comments regarding quitting vaping). TikTok videos (N = 412) with the hashtags #quitvaping and #quittingvaping were analyzed. Aspect-based sentiment analysis was conducted to evaluate the sentiment of quitting vaping in comments. Negative binomial regression models predicted video engagement from six message themes, ratios of gain and loss frames, and message sources. Themes related to nicotine addiction and physical health effectively drove positive engagement, such as likes and shares. The theme of harmful chemicals elicited mixed responses, generating both positive and negative comments regarding quitting vaping. Videos with a higher ratio of gain frames led to more positive engagement, including likes, shares, and positive comments regarding quitting vaping. Sources with informal expertise (e.g. those who have successfully quit vaping) and current e-cigarette users were more effective in engaging the TikTok audience than non-expert and non-user sources. These findings provide insights into messaging strategies that can effectively engage TikTok audiences and encourage vaping cessation.

Despite the robust scientific evidence affirming the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines, the proliferation of misinformation on social media platforms poses a threat by potentially exacerbating vaccine hesitancy. In response, certain social media platforms have taken measures to flag posts containing such misinformation with warning labels, aiming to dispel false beliefs. This present study employs a survey experiment (N = 304) to examine the effectiveness of two distinct warning labels - disputed and neutral warning labels - in the Twitter (the social media platform now known as X) context, specifically targeting misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines. This study investigates the nuanced effects of vaccine hesitancy on the perceived credibility of debunked misinformation posts following the application of warning flags. The results demonstrated that disputed labels significantly reduced the perceived credibility of misinformation regarding anti-COVID-19 vaccines in comparison to posts without any labeling. Nevertheless, individuals exhibiting higher levels of vaccine hesitancy tended to view the misinformation as more credible than their counterparts with lower levels of hesitancy. These findings present the efficacy of warning labels in combatting misinformation on social media platforms, particularly among those who are least hesitant about vaccination.

HPV-associated cancer disparities disproportionately affect Black/African American and Hispanic individuals in the U.S. HPV vaccination, which can prevent many HPV-associated cancers, should be clearly recommended by pediatricians to parents of adolescents aged 9-12, yet uptake and completion remain lower than other adolescent vaccinations. We used the Structural Influence Model of Health Communication to explore communication inequalities from interviews with 19 Black and Hispanic mothers of adolescents. We identified HPV vaccination information seeking behaviors, media use, and preferred channels to address information needs. This study provides insights into how mothers' nativity and ethno-racial identity influenced how they accessed and processed information from various sources. Preferences for digital and community-based strategies to address information gaps and hesitancy concerns are also presented. Findings suggest future prevention strategies must increase access to accurate information that resonates with NH-Black and Hispanic communities' needs and is disseminated via preferred communication channels to maximize the effects of multi-level interventions promoting HPV vaccination among communities experiencing disparities.

In 2021, vaccination against COVID-19 became mandatory for healthcare workers in England. The media coverage of the mandate was extensive and became an issue of public interest. This study aimed to understand the United Kingdom (UK) debate on mandatory COVID-19 vaccination through a framing analysis of UK media coverage. Articles written between November 2021 and April 2022 were identified from UK national newspapers: The Daily (and Sunday) Telegraph, the Times (and Sunday Times), the Guardian (and the Observer), the Independent, the Daily Mail (and Mail on Sunday), the Daily Mirror, the Daily Express, and the Sun. Articles were selected using eligibility criteria before framing analysis was undertaken. The sample included 204 articles. Safe Staffing, Treatment of Staff, Change in Covid Context, and Protect Patient Safety were identified as frames used to stimulate debate on the mandatory vaccination policy. Such frames established three broader concepts in the media: civil liberty theory, duty-based ethics, and social-vulnerability theory. This study analyzed how mandatory COVID-19 vaccination for healthcare workers in England was framed in the UK national media. The broader concepts built in the media heightened debate on the policy, creating a voluminous amount of coverage and criticism that may have played a role in the mandate's reversal.

Autoimmune disease disproportionately afflicts women of color (i.e., Black/African American, Hispanic/Latina, Multiethnic-racial) of childbearing age. Social determinants of health (SDOH) and dismissive healthcare provider (HCP) interactions exacerbate these disparities in health outcomes for women of color with autoimmune disease. Guided by the theory of communicative (dis)enfranchisement, this study assesses whether disenfranchising talk (DT) mediates the relationship between SDOH (i.e., race/ethnicity, insurance status, income, employment, education, and sexual orientation) and health outcomes including patient satisfaction, overall well-being, and tangible social support for women of color with autoimmune disease. Findings affirmed the mediating role of DT, such that Multiethnic-racial patients and those with less insurance coverage and lower household income reported less tangible social support, poorer overall well-being, and lower patient satisfaction when they experienced HCP DT. We offer theoretical and practical implications.

Patient-centered communication (PCC) is considered a key component of quality healthcare, with reported levels of PCC rising over the last decade. However, engagement with patient emotions and uncertainty have been slower to rise, and healthcare providers at times use PCC behaviors to manipulate patients. Healthcare providers' use of the communication theory of resilience's (CTR) processes could benefit patients. A cross-sectional survey in the United States (N = 486) tested associations between CTR processes and patient satisfaction and perceived physical and mental health. All five core CTR processes were positively correlated with patient outcomes. When controlling for traditional PCC behaviors: (a) crafting normalcy, identity anchors, and alternative logics were positively related to patient satisfaction, (b) no processes were related to perceived mental health, and (c) communication networks, alternative logics, and productive action were positively related to perceived physical health. Condition severity moderated three associations. At moderate-high severity, crafting normalcy and communication networks were positively related to perceived mental health, and crafting normalcy was positively related to perceived physical health. Findings extend CTR into the patient-provider relationship and demonstrate the practical potential of CTR processes for improving patient outcomes. The study also forwards a measure of healthcare provider resilience communication (HPRC).

Government health messaging is significant to the containment of public health crises. Such communication may benefit from using fear appeal, a message strategy for promoting health and preventing diseases. Yet little scholarly attention has been paid to how fear appeal is employed in government messaging to promote social media engagement through online actions including likes, shares, and comments. These actions play a meaningful role in addressing communication exigencies within the context of health crises. In this study, quantitative content analysis and corpus linguistics methods were employed to analyze fear appeal-related elements in COVID-19 messages sent by a state-owned media outlet on social media. The results show that when compared to messages without threat, messages conveying threat elicited significantly more comments, in which emotions and perceptions to threat and efficacy were exhibited, while messages containing both threat and efficacy generated more engagement in comparison to messages with threat alone. Moreover, while subdimensions under efficacy were positive predictors of engagement, those under threat were primarily found to have exerted negative effects. The findings provide insights into how fear appeal elements can be employed in government health crisis communication to engage the public.

This research examined the themes that emerge from online discussions of the COVID-19 vaccines to assist health communicators and officials in combating misinformation in health-related discussions. Using framing theory and the diffusion of innovation framework, this study presents findings from a semantic network analysis of 3842 tweets collected during the first week of February 2022. The authors calculated betweenness and page rank centrality scores for Twitter users participating in the online dialogue and identified 36 semantic themes. Findings revealed that the most influential dialogue participants were retired health and medical professionals, data analysts, journalists, online advocates, and politicians. The frames identified in the study contained several misinformation narratives about the COVID-19 vaccines. The authors discuss the implications of these findings for health officials and communicators as well as the theoretical implications of the diffusion of misinformation and framing as a tool to reiterate untruths.

More than half of women of reproductive age in India are anemic. This study investigates the role of interpersonal communication in increasing the consumption of iron-folic acid supplements. Interventions that increase interpersonal communication may influence and empower individuals and the larger community in promoting behavior change. This investigation uses data from a cluster randomized intervention to understand the pathways by which interpersonal communication mediates the consumption of iron-folic acid supplements. Longitudinal data from control and intervention arms in rural Odisha, India, were collected at baseline (N = 3,691) and 20 months later at end-line (N = 3,394). Structural equation models highlighted the positive role of interpersonal communication in mediating iron-folic acid supplement use. This study illustrates that even during social distancing due to COVID-19, strategic interpersonal communication can improve iron-folic acid supplement use. Our results elucidate two key interpersonal communication pathways at play, namely the ritualistic and instrumental pathways in improving health behavior change in the community.