Evaluating the reach and impact of emergency risk communication during public health emergencies  Laura E. Pechta, PhD, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Keri Lubell, PhD, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Matthew W. Seeger, PhD, Wayne State University International Crisis and Risk Communication Conference March 15, 2017

CDC Emergency Risk Communication CDC Emergency Risk Communication Branch (ERCB) located in Division of Emergency Operations, Office of Public Health Preparedness and Response ERCB provides staffing for core teams when the Joint Information Center (JIC) is activated for a response

CDC Joint Information Center Goals Coordinates CDC messaging and materials development across the response Has primary responsibility for the development and implementation of communication strategy Ensures the use of emergency risk communication principles from CERC and other frameworks Incorporates plain language and “clear communication” Ensures messages are tailored for needs of audiences Coordinates reviews of scientific and communication products (i.e., clearance) for the entire response

Key Challenges in Evaluating Emergency Risk Communication Lack of clear criteria for evaluating ERC impact Limited resources to incorporate evaluation throughout the communication process Lack of routine data to monitor ERC processes and outcomes Challenges developing standardized ERC metrics across multiple CDC programs Access and data collection challenges across disaster types

Project Goals Develop indicators to assess the quality, effectiveness and impact of CDC ERC Measures to be operationalized for a range of emergency events Measures to assess CDC internal processes Measures to assess impact of ERC on target audiences Identify potential data sources and data collection methods

Methods Peer review and grey literature Develop conceptual framework to describe ERC development, dissemination and impact Create logic model of how ERC “should” work Draft and test measures/indicators

ERC Logic Model

Information Seeking Construct – Zika Example Definition: Information seeking refers to intentional, active efforts to obtain specific information above and beyond the normal patterns of media exposure and interpersonal sources Evaluation question: To what extent are consumer audiences seeking information from the CDC and CDC partners? Indicators: Increase in the number of people seeking Zika information from CDC, Increase in the number of people seeking guidance about Zika from healthcare providers Potential Data Sources: CDC web metrics, CDC call center data, national surveys/polls conducted with U.S. adults Example measures: Number of inquiries to CDC-INFO and CDC web page views relevant to Zika (e.g., Zika and Pregnancy, Zika Travel health Notices, Facts about Microcephaly, etc.) At any time, have you talked with a doctor, nurse, or other healthcare worker about Zika virus?

Self Efficacy Construct – Zika Example Definition: Extent to which people believe they are capable of performing specific behaviors in order to attain certain goals. ERC messages that are actionable are considered more effective and generally increase self-efficacy Evaluation question: To what extent has CDC ERC increased self-efficacy among healthcare providers? Indicator: Increased self-efficacy in responding to Zika among healthcare providers Potential data sources: National surveys/polls conducted with healthcare providers Example measures: Please indicate how much you agree or disagree with the following: I feel confident in my ability to talk to my patients about Zika virus infection I know which patients to refer for Zika virus testing

Factors Under Consideration Audiences Many potential target audiences Indicators/measures to will vary across audiences Not all ERC constructs relevant for all audiences Type and Scope of Response Natural disasters, environmental, infectious disease outbreak National/international (long-term) vs. regional/local (short-term) Implications for measures, data sources and data collection methods Measurement Approach Direct vs. indirect indicators Primary data collection vs. secondary data sources Feasibility/acceptability considerations Options in data sources

Why is assessment important? Matching resources to conditions: Scope and scale of the event Real time feedback and adjustment Situational awareness Demonstrating the role and value of ERC Learning and improvement

Discussion and Questions The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.