National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: 6 A Systems Perspective on Strengthening Risk Communication and Community Engagement in Disease Outbreak Response
Suggested Citation:"7 Workshop Highlights and Reflections." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Building Communication Capacity to Counter Infectious Disease Threats: Proceedings of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24738.
×

7

Workshop Highlights and Reflections

Throughout the workshop, crosscutting themes emerged from the presentations and discussions on the challenges of strengthening communication capacity to prevent, detect, and respond to infectious disease threats and potential strategies and next steps in moving forward. Rafael Obregon, chief of the Communication for Development Section of the United Nations Children’s Fund, presented the results of polling practitioners, academics, researchers, and others from various sectors who work in areas of public health, communication, and emergency preparedness and response about the biggest challenge they face for building communication capacity to counter infectious disease threats. The workshop planning committee asked this question by email, Facebook, and Twitter more than 30 days prior to the workshop. The more than 150 responses were compiled into a word cloud (see Figure 7-1). Obregon observed that the key words that emerged from this poll are very similar to issues that arose throughout the workshop: trust, coordination, transparency, managing information, and integration. “In many ways, what this does is reinforces the criticality of these issues when it comes to building communication capacity,” said Obregon.

The workshop discussions over 1.5 days allowed participants not only to raise challenges, but also to review lessons and present potential strategies to strengthen communication capacities to counter infectious disease threats. Jeffrey Duchin, health officer and chief of the Communicable Disease Epidemiology and Immunization Section for Public Health in Seattle and King County, Washington, and Lonnie King, professor and dean emeritus of The Ohio State University College of Veterinary Medicine, sum-

Suggested Citation:"7 Workshop Highlights and Reflections." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Building Communication Capacity to Counter Infectious Disease Threats: Proceedings of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24738.
×
images
FIGURE 7-1 Responses to the question, “In one word, what do you think the biggest challenge is with building communication capacity to counter infectious disease threats?
SOURCE: Obregon presentation, December 14, 2016.

marized what they believed were the highlights of and the lessons learned from the discussions from day one and two of the workshop, respectively. For day one, when the discussions focused on the foundations of effective communication and achieving effective communication in practice, Duchin summarized his takeaways in the areas of leadership and policy; collaboration and trust; message design, delivery, and management; and research and evaluation (see Box 7-1).

Discussions on the second day focused on the role of data and evidence in informing communication strategies in the field, particularly drawing lessons from the recent Ebola and Zika outbreaks, and a systems perspective in strengthening risk communication for infectious disease threats. King

Suggested Citation:"7 Workshop Highlights and Reflections." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Building Communication Capacity to Counter Infectious Disease Threats: Proceedings of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24738.
×
Suggested Citation:"7 Workshop Highlights and Reflections." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Building Communication Capacity to Counter Infectious Disease Threats: Proceedings of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24738.
×

reflected that, when building communication capacity and designing messages, we need to remind ourselves that we begin with goals: “You begin with the end in mind, and the messaging is just not a message. It is how you achieve that end point—what is it we are trying to do, how that alters people’s behaviors, and is the message really true to that.” These messages, King added, should be supported by data as well as information derived from two-way communication between the communities and the experts. “In the midst of all the science,” King observed, “it is still about people, and empathy is a big part of that. If you are not sincere and really talk about the human issues that are involved in these terrible outbreaks, you lose credibility right away, no matter how smart you are.”

With all the complexity involved in managing outbreaks and communicating infectious disease threats, King stressed the need for interdisciplinary teams of clinicians, epidemiologists, social anthropologists, sociologists, information and technology experts, and others to work together. Redefining who is exactly responsible for risk communication during an outbreak may also be important. King said, “So often we think it is just a communication health expert, but we know now it is much more than that. People have to have skillsets in various parts of that outbreak to do that well.”

At the systems level, risk communication capacity is one of the core capacities that countries have to implement under the International Health Regulations. King emphasized the value of the joint external evaluation to assess the risk communication capacities of countries moving forward to ensure that countries have the ability to communicate promptly and adequately to prevent, detect, and respond to infectious disease threats. Standard operating procedures can be critical, providing tools and guiding actions and responsibilities when an outbreak occurs. As the emergence of infectious diseases and the cost of not doing more to respond to them is on the rise, King concluded his remarks by highlighting the importance of generating and applying science, reflecting on lessons learned, using that information to improve communication techniques and capacity, and coordinating with multiple partners to successfully counter infectious disease threats.

Suggested Citation:"7 Workshop Highlights and Reflections." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Building Communication Capacity to Counter Infectious Disease Threats: Proceedings of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24738.
×
Page 93
Suggested Citation:"7 Workshop Highlights and Reflections." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Building Communication Capacity to Counter Infectious Disease Threats: Proceedings of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24738.
×
Page 94
Suggested Citation:"7 Workshop Highlights and Reflections." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Building Communication Capacity to Counter Infectious Disease Threats: Proceedings of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24738.
×
Page 95
Suggested Citation:"7 Workshop Highlights and Reflections." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Building Communication Capacity to Counter Infectious Disease Threats: Proceedings of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24738.
×
Page 96
Next: References »
Building Communication Capacity to Counter Infectious Disease Threats: Proceedings of a Workshop Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $60.00 Buy Ebook | $48.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Building communication capacity is a critical piece of preparing for, detecting, and responding to infectious disease threats. The International Health Regulations (IHR) establish risk communication—the real-time exchange of information, advice, and opinions between experts or officials and people who face a threat to their survival, health, and economic or social well-being—as a core capacity that World Health Organization member states must fulfill to strengthen the fight against these threats. Despite global recognition of the importance of complying with IHR, 67 percent of signatory countries report themselves as not compliant. By investing in communication capacity, public health and government officials and civil society organizations facing health crises would be prepared to provide advice, information, and reassurance to the public as well as to rapidly develop messages and community engagement activities that are coordinated and take into account social and behavioral dynamics among all sectors.

To learn about current national and international efforts to develop the capacity to communicate effectively during times of infectious disease outbreaks, and to explore gaps in the research agenda that may help address communication needs to advance the field, the Forum on Microbial Threats of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine convened a 1.5 day workshop on December 13 and 14, 2016, in Washington, DC. Participants reviewed progress and needs in strengthening communication capacity for dealing with infectious disease threats for both outbreaks and routine challenges in the United States and abroad. This publication summarizes the presentations and discussions from the workshop.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!