Enhancing the Adoption of Evidence-Based Health Marketing and Promotion Strategies in Local Communities: Building a Communication Dissemination and Support System for the National Diabetes Prevention Program

Abstract

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) created a health communication marketing and promotion support system (support system) to help 10 CDC-funded national organizations (recipients) grow enrollment of underserved populations in the National Diabetes Prevention Program. This article describes the creation of a successful support system to increase the use of effective marketing approaches and key messaging. The support system was developed using a systematic approach. It included a needs assessment, audience research, marketing strategy identification, expert panel review, materials development, and dissemination guidance. Hands-on, individualized, and group end-user training and technical assistance was also included. Recipients received culturally and linguistically tailored marketing materials to support their specific priority audiences, as well as corresponding training on recommended dissemination methods. In in-depth key-informant interviews, staff from six recipients reported increased knowledge of local communities and audiences, efficacy and skills to conduct media interviews, capacity to identify and train champions and influencers, and greater community partner investments. With marketing support, 90% of recipients reported increased enrollment, of which 40% exceeded self-set targets and another 40% doubled or tripled their enrollment numbers. These findings indicate that a customized strategic health communication marketing and promotion support system presents a significant opportunity to help recipients increase enrollment in evidence-based interventions. Practitioners disseminating evidence-based interventions may consider a support system to increase program uptake.

Activities used by evidence networks to promote evidence-informed decision-making in the health sector– a rapid evidence review

“…The 35 included articles were mainly in the United States ( n = 14) [ 16 – 29 ], Canada ( n = 5) [ 30 – 34 ], Sweden ( n = 2) [ 35 , 36 ], and in other single locations such as Australia, Brazil, Burundi, India, Kenya, and Nigeria, among others ( n = 14) [ 37 – 50 ]. Of those included, 16 articles were qualitative studies [ 18 , 20 , 25 , 28 , 31 – 36 , 44 , 45 , 47 – 50 ], nine were non-empirical papers [ 19 , 22 , 23 , 37 – 39 , 41 – 43 ], four were quantitative studies [ 26 , 27 , 29 , 40 ], and six were mixed methods [ 16 , 17 , 21 , 24 , 30 , 46 ]. Eleven studies reported a population of interest, which were mainly Indigenous groups [ 31 , 34 , 48 ], older adults [ 19 ], patients in patient group programmes [ 21 , 27 ], academic faculty and researchers [ 40 ], and mental health practitioners [ 16 ], among others.…”

“…Of those included, 16 articles were qualitative studies [ 18 , 20 , 25 , 28 , 31 – 36 , 44 , 45 , 47 – 50 ], nine were non-empirical papers [ 19 , 22 , 23 , 37 – 39 , 41 – 43 ], four were quantitative studies [ 26 , 27 , 29 , 40 ], and six were mixed methods [ 16 , 17 , 21 , 24 , 30 , 46 ]. Eleven studies reported a population of interest, which were mainly Indigenous groups [ 31 , 34 , 48 ], older adults [ 19 ], patients in patient group programmes [ 21 , 27 ], academic faculty and researchers [ 40 ], and mental health practitioners [ 16 ], among others. The article characteristics are summarised in Appendix 3 .…”

“…Overall, the quality of the included literature could be classified as high. Of the 35 included articles, 26 publications were reviewed with the MMAT [ 16 – 18 , 20 , 21 , 24 – 36 , 40 , 44 – 50 ]. After assessing the included articles, the average score was 4.4.…”

“…These activities aimed to strengthen research methodology skills in participants such as policymakers and fieldworkers. Activities undertaken in the initial phases of the research process included assessing recipient needs [ 21 ], conducting early evidence assessments [ 22 ], engaging in priority audience research [ 21 ], involving stakeholders in the formulation of designing research objectives [ 50 ], conducting systematic reviews [ 42 ], creating evidence maps based on existing data, and collaborating with stakeholders in the development of research protocols [ 28 ].…”

Factors affecting consumer attitudes towards using digital media platforms on health knowledge communication: Findings of cognition–affect–conation pattern

“…Most research underwent consisted of fervent discussion concerning how practitioners or a specific population would use digital media to promote good health practices within certain patient groups, i.e., pregnant women, or to prevent the development of conditions such as diabetes and cancer ( Beaudoin and Hong, 2017 ; Collins et al, 2020 ; Williams et al, 2021 ; Álvarez-Pérez et al, 2022 ; John et al, 2022 ). Furthermore, some research has concluded that health promotion should be included as a core lesson in schools to tackle fake news which spread at a speed comparable to a virus replicating in the body.…”