Health-Related Disaster Communication and Social Media: Mixed-Method Systematic Review

Abstract

This mixed-method evidence synthesis drew on Cochrane methods and principles to systematically review literature published between 2003 and 2016 on the best social media practices to promote health protection and dispel misinformation during disasters. Seventy-nine studies employing quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods on risk communication during disasters in all UN-languages were reviewed, finding that agencies need to contextualize the use of social media for particular populations and crises. Social media are tools that still have not become routine practices in many governmental agencies regarding public health in the countries studied. Social media, especially Twitter and Facebook (and equivalents in countries such as China), need to be incorporated into daily operations of governmental agencies and implementing partners to build familiarity with them before health-related crises happen. This was especially observed in U.S. agencies, local government, and first responders but also for city governments and school administrations in Europe. For those that do use social media during health-related risk communication, studies find that public relations officers, governmental agencies, and the general public have used social media successfully to spread truthful information and to verify information to dispel rumors during disasters. Few studies focused on the recovery and preparation phases and on countries in the Southern hemisphere, except for Australia. The vast majority of studies did not analyze the demographics of social media users beyond their geographic location, their status of being inside/outside the disaster zone; and their frequency and content of posting. Socioeconomic demographics were not collected and/or analyzed to drill deeper into the implications of using social media to reach vulnerable populations. Who exactly is reached via social media campaigns and who needs to be reached with other means has remained an understudied area.

Mortality Reporting and Rumor Generation: An Assessment of Crisis and Emergency Risk Communication following Hurricane María in Puerto Rico

“…Inevitably, disaster communication exists within a larger disaster information environment, compelling communicators to monitor and interact with this environment (Savoia et al, 2017). An increasing number of studies highlight the impact that news media can have on public perceptions and behaviors in crises (Eckert et al, 2018;Parmer et al, 2016;Westerman et. al., 2014), demonstrating its potential to be leveraged for its broad public reach and familiarity (Littlefield & Quenette, 2007;Reynolds & Seeger, 2005).…”

Ebola and Localized Blame on Social Media: Analysis of Twitter and Facebook Conversations During the 2014–2015 Ebola Epidemic

“…In a parallel manner, given that we had fewer media outlets than initially planned, we chose three for the United States, including two that are ideologically opposed (CNN and Fox News) as well as a news outlet which not very politically inclined (Huffington Post). This heterogeneous sample of countries, with an overrepresentation of West African countries' media outlets, is justified by our attempt to counteract an ethnocentric bias in the academic field of health communication and social media, which often neglects the Southern hemisphere, including Africa (Eckert et al 2018). The dataset eventually included over 14 million Facebook comments.…”

Communicating about infectious disease threats: Insights from public health information officers

“…However, efficacy information, encouraging self-efficacy and response efficacy that lead to appropriate emergency response (Reynolds & Seeger, 2005), was found to be insufficient in the same study (Vos & Buckner, 2016). A recent systematic review of health-related disaster communication and social media (2003)(2004)(2005)(2006)(2007)(2008)(2009)(2010)(2011)(2012)(2013)(2014)(2015)(2016) (Eckert et al 2017), further revealed that: 1) social media, as public communication tools, have yet to become routine practice in government health agencies;…”