Developing Health Communication Materials During a Pandemic

Abstract

As the COVID-19 virus spread rapidly around the world, information related to the pandemic also spread quickly and in massive amounts. Uncertainty and unknowns about the pandemic together with the explosion of information created confusion and fear among many populations. A major challenge for public health practitioners is to provide clear and consistent messages that can be understood by different types of audiences, including vulnerable populations such as pregnant women and children who are often forgotten in this process. We compared and analyzed the development processes of health communication products for pregnant women in Madagascar and for elementary school children in Japan during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study compared these two field experiences in different socioeconomic settings to identify common strategies for the development of communication materials in a health crisis. The two cases both developed communication materials developed in collaboration with key local communicators and the target audiences. Both products used a simple and clear structure and included do's and don'ts. Messages were tailored toward the lifestyles of the target audience and phrased to fit with cultural and linguistic contexts. Both developer teams paid attention to easy-to-understand words and culturally accepted design and colors. The final products were distributed swiftly and widely through multiple channels with the local community. These two field experiences demonstrate common strategies for developing health communication materials that are culturally-tailored and visually-appealing in a timely manner and can be disseminated through existing channels in a health crisis. Our experiences emphasize that collaborative and iterative efforts based on an existing trust relationship with the target community can provide the foundation for a rapid communication response in a health crisis.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 20 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.