[评估冠状病毒大流行期间采取的公共卫生措施:以证据为基础的风险交流必须成为中心议题]。

IF 1.7 Q4 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen Pub Date : 2024-05-01 Epub Date: 2024-04-15 DOI:10.1016/j.zefq.2024.03.004
Ingrid Mühlhauser , Johannes Pantel , Gabriele Meyer
{"title":"[评估冠状病毒大流行期间采取的公共卫生措施:以证据为基础的风险交流必须成为中心议题]。","authors":"Ingrid Mühlhauser ,&nbsp;Johannes Pantel ,&nbsp;Gabriele Meyer","doi":"10.1016/j.zefq.2024.03.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Evidence-based and comprehensible health information is a key element of evidence-based medicine and public health. The goal is informed decision-making based on realistic estimations of health risks and accurate expectations about benefits and harms of interventions. In Germany, standards of evidence-based risk information were poorly followed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Frequently, public information was biased, fragmentary and misleading. Pandemic-related threat scenarios induced emotional distress and unnecessary anxiety. A systematic and comprehensive evaluation of the pandemic measures is crucial, but still pending in Germany. A critical analysis of risk communication by experts, politicians and the media during the pandemic should be a key element of the evaluation process. Evaluation of decision making and media reporting during the pandemic should improve preparedness for future crises.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46628,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen","volume":"186 ","pages":"Pages 35-42"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1865921724000527/pdfft?md5=cf5d5d6ed253eab8d1d9ee8ad223ac3b&pid=1-s2.0-S1865921724000527-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Aufarbeitung der Corona-Pandemiemaßnahmen - Evidenzbasierte Risikokommunikation muss ein zentrales Thema sein\",\"authors\":\"Ingrid Mühlhauser ,&nbsp;Johannes Pantel ,&nbsp;Gabriele Meyer\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.zefq.2024.03.004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Evidence-based and comprehensible health information is a key element of evidence-based medicine and public health. The goal is informed decision-making based on realistic estimations of health risks and accurate expectations about benefits and harms of interventions. In Germany, standards of evidence-based risk information were poorly followed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Frequently, public information was biased, fragmentary and misleading. Pandemic-related threat scenarios induced emotional distress and unnecessary anxiety. A systematic and comprehensive evaluation of the pandemic measures is crucial, but still pending in Germany. A critical analysis of risk communication by experts, politicians and the media during the pandemic should be a key element of the evaluation process. Evaluation of decision making and media reporting during the pandemic should improve preparedness for future crises.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46628,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen\",\"volume\":\"186 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 35-42\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1865921724000527/pdfft?md5=cf5d5d6ed253eab8d1d9ee8ad223ac3b&pid=1-s2.0-S1865921724000527-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1865921724000527\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/4/15 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1865921724000527","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/4/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

以证据为基础的、可理解的健康信息是循证医学和公共卫生的关键要素。其目标是根据对健康风险的现实估计和对干预措施利弊的准确预期做出知情决策。在德国,COVID-19 大流行期间,以证据为基础的风险信息标准没有得到很好的遵守。公共信息往往有失偏颇、支离破碎并具有误导性。与大流行病相关的威胁情景诱发了情绪困扰和不必要的焦虑。对大流行病措施进行系统全面的评估至关重要,但在德国仍有待进行。对专家、政治家和媒体在大流行病期间进行的风险交流进行批判性分析应成为评估过程的关键要素。对大流行病期间的决策和媒体报道进行评估应能改进对未来危机的准备工作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Aufarbeitung der Corona-Pandemiemaßnahmen - Evidenzbasierte Risikokommunikation muss ein zentrales Thema sein

Evidence-based and comprehensible health information is a key element of evidence-based medicine and public health. The goal is informed decision-making based on realistic estimations of health risks and accurate expectations about benefits and harms of interventions. In Germany, standards of evidence-based risk information were poorly followed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Frequently, public information was biased, fragmentary and misleading. Pandemic-related threat scenarios induced emotional distress and unnecessary anxiety. A systematic and comprehensive evaluation of the pandemic measures is crucial, but still pending in Germany. A critical analysis of risk communication by experts, politicians and the media during the pandemic should be a key element of the evaluation process. Evaluation of decision making and media reporting during the pandemic should improve preparedness for future crises.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
18.20%
发文量
129
期刊最新文献
[Health care assistants in German primary care - A structural analysis]. [Clinical testing of the updated S3-level guideline for non-specific neck pain with physiotherapists and patients: A mixed-methods approach]. Ein neuer Ansatz für Versorgungsevaluationen: Erprobung des PopGroupers für Vergleichsgruppenbildung und Morbiditätsmessung am Beispiel der DMP KHK und Brustkrebs Übersetzung und Validitätsprüfung der Selbsteinschätzungsskala für digitale Kompetenzen Pflegestudierender Status quo des Antibiotic Stewardship in deutschen Krankenhäusern aus der Perspektive der Krankenhausapotheker*innen – Ergebnisse der ADKA-Umfrage 2023
×
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学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
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