Search results

The purpose of this paper is to assess how college students received and responded to H1N1 pandemic emergency preparedness information and to assess college students’ knowledge and attitudes towards H1N1 during the height of the H1N1 epidemic and corresponding public health response to the outbreak.

Using a case study approach, the researchers conducted five focus groups at a large Southeastern US university between October 20‐29, 2009.

In order to effectively communicate emergency preparedness information to college students, universities should rely on interpersonal communication and mediated communication from trusted sources. College students need to understand the health‐related emergency, the risk of the emergency, basic steps to avoid it, and only pertinent cues to action. Oversaturation of this information can lead college students to lessen their perceived importance of the disaster prevention information.

Focus groups were conducted during only two consecutive weeks of the H1N1 epidemic, and snowball sampling may have led to sample bias.

This research was conducted during the height of the H1N1 pandemic, and is the only study to date that explores college students’ knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors towards H1N1.

This study aims at exploring the topology of two risk communication cases, Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) in 2008 and H1N1 in 2009, in South Korea and investigating the progression of risk events related to media's role in risk amplification.

Content analysis of major Korean media is conducted. BSE and H1N1 stories in 2008 and 2009 are collected and analyzed. First, the basic nature of media coverage of the events such as frequency of stories is surveyed. Second, framings adopted in media to cover two cases are analyzed.

The result indicates that unfolding events related to BSE and H1N1 risk show a similar timeline with the frequency of media coverage of the given risks. Also, media adopted political framings for BSE and health/medial framings for H1N1.The authors cautiously suggest that the framings in media have influenced the politicization of BSE risk issue among the public, but, at the same time, the media framings on H1N1 have attenuated potential politicization of H1N1's risk.

This paper demonstrates the relationship between the process of social amplification of risk and media framings in Korea.

This paper aims to explore the links among health authorities’ public relations efforts, news media coverage, and public perceptions of risk during the H1N1 pandemic outbreak.

This study used a triangulation of research methods by comparing public relations materials, media coverage, and public opinion. The data were collected from a federal government web site, national newspapers, and national polls.

The data revealed a positive relationship between information subsidy attention and media attention to the H1N1 disease as well as the severity attribute. The salience of the severity attribute in information subsidies was linked with increased H1N1 salience in media coverage, extending the testing of the compelling-arguments hypothesis to an agenda-building context. However, there was no association between salience of the severity attribute and public risk perceptions.

The study provides evidence for public relations effectiveness. However, the limited influence of the severity frame on the public's risk perception suggests a gap between news coverage and the public's view. Framing that effectively empowers the public to engage in desired behavior should be further studied for the success of a public health campaign. The study is limited to examining the severity attribute. A future study should pay more attention to different issue attributes or other frames. The media sample was limited to newspapers and thus lacks generalizability.

The study contributes to public relations scholarship by demonstrating how information subsidies influence media agendas and public opinion in a health communication context. The public health authorities’ role in influencing media agenda should be stressed.

The purpose of this paper is to show that 2009 H1N1 “swine” influenza pandemic vaccination policies deviated from predictions established in the theory of political survival, and to propose that pandemic response deviated because it was ruled by bureaucratized experts rather than by elected politicians.

Focussing on the 2009 H1N1 pandemic, the paper employs descriptive statistical analysis of vaccination policies in nine western democracies. To probe the plausibility of the novel explanation, it uses quantitative and qualitative content analyses of media attention and coverage in two deviant cases, the USA and Denmark.

Theories linking political survival to disaster responses find little empirical support in the substantial cross-country variations of vaccination responses during the 2009 H1N1 pandemic. Rather than following a political logic, the case studies of media coverage in the USA and Denmark demonstrate that the response was bureaucratized in the public health agencies (CDC and DMHA, respectively). Hence, while natural disaster responses appear to follow a political logic, the response to pandemics appears to be more strongly instituted in the hands of bureaucratic experts.

There is an added value of encompassing bureaucratic dynamics in political theories of disaster response; bureaucratized expertise proved to constitute a strong plausible explanation of the 2009 pandemic vaccination response.

Pandemic preparedness and response depends critically on understanding the lessons of the 2009 H1N1 pandemic; a key lesson supported by this paper is that expert-based agencies rather than political leaders are the pivotal actors.

This paper is the first to pinpoint the limitations of political survival theories of disaster responses with respect to the 2009 pandemic. Further, it is among the few to analyze the causes of variations in cross-country pandemic vaccination policies during the 2009 H1N1 pandemic.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the effects of different information sources on consumer health behavior during pandemics.

We collected survey data from 321 adults in a large western US city during November 2009 by mall and street intercepts. We analyzed their beliefs, attitudes and intentions with regard to adoption of the H1N1 (swine flu) vaccine. We developed and tested two alternative models on the role of mass media and personal information sources on the attitude towards the disease and the intention to get vaccinated.

Our study finds that mass media and personal sources of information simultaneously impact perceived threat from disease (attitude) and the intention to get vaccinated during a global pandemic. Personal information sources are more effective than mass media sources in impacting both attitude and intention. While the impact of mass media weakens from the attitude stage to the intention stage, the impact of personal information sources increases from the attitude stage to the intention stage.

The contribution of this paper to health policy makers and marketers is to draw implications on how mass media and personal information sources could be better utilized to counter future global pandemics.

Purpose – This chapter considers the social politics of H5N1 (“avian influenza”), the 2009 H1N1 pandemic, and the response to it within the context of the history of pandemic influenzas and the continuing need for robust preventative public health systems more generally. In particular, the author considers how the borders between nations, species, and individuals are thrown into relief and called into question by influenza outbreaks and their management.

Methodology/approach – This work relies on literature review, media research, and critical and interpretative sociological methods.

Findings – While panic surrounding new and potentially highly virulent influenza strains is reasonable, such panic is not sustainable and belies the fact that every year presents the danger of a pandemic. This chapter argues that, if public health systems only respond to immediate panic and fail to consider how quickly airborne diseases can cross all sorts of borders, they do not attend to the real need for far-seeing, long-term, internationally collaborative disease prevention and disaster preparedness.

Contribution to the field – The author offers a critical and wellness- and prevention-oriented perspective on what priorities should be emphasized in the rapidly growing fields of disaster studies and disaster preparedness, which, by their nature, tend to be crisis oriented and focused on the micro-term, with planning done on a case-by-case basis. Such a narrow focus can render preventative health systems inflexible and unable to rise to the challenge of a disease that can spread easily through casual contact.

As international users increase rapidly, multilingual systems have become a very important service for global users. The purpose of this paper is to design and implement an ontology‐driven medical information retrieval (OMIR) system by building a medical ontology based on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) medical records.

A traditional cataloging scheme is used as a navigation menu in the CDC system. This traditional cataloging scheme is transformed to a unique medical ontology for global users in the OMIR system. An experimental study was conducted on both an ontology‐driven medical information system (OMIR) and the CDC system.

The medical ontology can be used to filter out unsuitable resources based on semantic relationships. In addition, the recommended resources can be categorized and provide the patron with different languages to access resources. The OMIR system provides better relevancy and shorter search times compared with alternative systems.

The OMIR system is currently implemented for medical resources from the CDC. The developed method may also be applied to other domain areas.

This paper represents a practical method of building a multilingual medical information retrieval system and explains the functional use of ontological knowledge. This study provides insights into medical information seeking performance on the medical database systems.

The coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) pandemic mobilized the international scientific community in the search for its cure and containment. The purpose of this paper is to examine the nature of the rapid response to the COVID-19 of the scientific community in selected Latin American countries (Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia and Mexico) in the period running from January to August 2020. Rapid response is reconceptualized from its original meaning in health policy, as the swift mobilization of existing scientific resources to address an emergency (DeVita et al., 2017).

The paper explores the rapid response of the Argentinian, Brazilian, Chilean, Colombian and Mexican scientific communities from the perspective of bibliometric and altmetric data. The authors will examine scientific publications indexed to the Web of Science (WoS) dealing with COVID-19. Besides patterns of scientific output and impact as measured by citations, the authors complement the analysis with altmetric analysis. The aim is to verify whether or not factors that explain the extent of scientific impact can also be identified with respect to the wider impact made evident by altmetric indicators (Haustein, 2016).

The authors identified a somewhat limited response of the Argentinian, Brazilian, Chilean, Colombian and Mexican scientific communities to COVID-19 in terms of quantity of publications. The authorship of publications in the topic of COVID-19 was associated with authorship of publications dealing with locally relevant diseases. Some factors appear to contribute to visibility of scientific outputs. Papers that involved wider international collaborations and authors with previous publications in arboviruses were associated with higher levels of citations. Previous work on arbovirus was also associated with higher altmetric attention. The country of origin of authors exerted a positive effect on altmetric indicators.

A limitation in the analysis is that, due to the nature of the data source (WoS), the authors were unable to verify the career status and the productivity of the authors in the sample. Nonetheless, the results appear to suggest that there is some overlapping in authors conducting research in Arboviruses and COVID-19. Career status and productivity should be the focus of future research.

In the context of countries with limited scientific resources, like the ones investigated in our Latin American sample, previous efforts in the study of locally relevant diseases may contribute to the creation of an expertise that can be applied when a health emergency brings about a novel disease.

The originality of the paper rests on the fact that the authors identified that previous work on arbovirus contributed to the scientific visibility of publications on COVID-19.

The purpose of this paper is to empirically examine whether the massive spreads and fatalities of the COVID-19 pandemic in the USA, the country with the most advanced medical technology in the world, are symptomatic of leadership failure. The authors posit that when political leaders, such as the President of the USA, in conjunction with a group of state governors and city mayors, employed conspiracy theories and disinformation to achieve their political goals, they contributed to the massive spreads and fatalities of the virus, and they also undermined the credibility of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the health-care professionals in providing the pertinent control guidelines and true scientific-based medical information.

The authors conducted a review of current studies that address the handling of global infectious diseases to build a better understanding of the issue of pandemics. They then employed a theoretical framework to link the massive spreads and fatalities of the COVID-19 pandemic to political leaders, such as President Trump and the group of obsequious state governors and city mayors, who propagated conspiracy theories and disinformation through social media platforms to downplay the severity of the virus. The authors compared the massive spreads and fatalities of the COVID-19 pandemic in the USA under President Trump to President Obama who handled H1N1, Ebola, Zika and Dengue. More importantly, the authors compared President Trump's handling of the COVID-19 pandemic to other political leaders in advanced countries where there were no concerted efforts to spread conspiracy theories and disinformation about the health risks of COVID-19 pandemic.

The authors' theoretical analysis alluded to the fact that political leaders, such as President Trump, who are engulfed in self-deceptions, self-projections and self-aggrandizements would engage in self-promotion and avoid accountability for their missteps in handling global pandemic shocks. In contrast, political leaders in other advanced countries did not downplay the severity thus their ability to curtail the spreads and fatalities of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The theoretical viewpoints presented in this paper along with the derivations of the spreads–fatalities curtailment coefficients and the spread–fatality upsurge coefficients under Presidents Obama and Trump, respectively, may not be replicable. Given this plausible limitation, future research may need to provide a deep analysis of the amplifications of conspiracy theories and disinformation because they are now deeply rooted in the political economy of the USA. Furthermore, since scientists and medical professionals may not be able to forecast future epidemics or pandemics with pin-point accuracy nor predict how political leaders would disseminate health risks information associated with different pathogens, it is imperative that future research addresses the positive or adverse effects of conspiracy theories and disinformation that are now easily propagated simultaneously through different social media platforms, which are currently protected under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. The multiplier effects of conspiracy theories and disinformation will continue to amplify the division about the authenticity of COVID-19 pandemic and the emergence or reemergence of other pathogens in the foreseeable future.

The authors derived the unique spreads-fatalities curtailment coefficients to demonstrate how President Obama used effective collaboration and coordination at all levels of government in conjunction with medical experts to curtail the spreads and fatalities associated with H1N1, Ebola, Zika and Dengue. They further derived the spreads-fatalities upsurge coefficients to highlight how President Trump contributed to the spreads and fatalities of COVID-19 pandemic through his inability to collaborate and coordinate with state governors, city mayors and different health-care agencies at the national and international levels.

The recent decades have witnessed the rising frequency and severity of infectious diseases in the international context and their detrimental impacts on the corporate world as a result of growing interconnection among nations. This study aims to examine the effect of previous infectious diseases (H5N1, H1N1 and MERS) on the disclosure of corporate social responsibility (CSR) among listed Chinese firms from 2006 to 2017.

Firm-level financial and CSR data of Chinese non-financial listed firms are from the China Stock Market and Accounting Research database. The data on corporate governance are collected from Bloomberg financial database. Three infectious diseases under examination are H5N1 (2006–2007), H1N1 (2009–2010) and MERS (2015–2016). This study uses the fixed-effect estimations to account for time-invariant differences among the firms in the sample.

The results reveal that Chinese firms disclose less CSR information during the time of public health crises, and this impact is more pronounced in small-sized and low-growth firms. Besides, the analysis suggests that Chinese firms are becoming more resilient to infectious diseases.

The findings provide implications for corporate stakeholders to understand corporate policies under uncertainties and inform vulnerable businesses to develop an appropriate CSR strategy in preparation for future health calamities.

This study provides new insights into how businesses react to previous epidemics and pandemics at different scales other than the COVID-19 pandemic. Besides, the findings shed light on the dynamic of firms’ CSR engagement during and after the infectious outbreaks.