Thread by @masknerd

[1]How it goes forward: A blueprint for communication
with the public about GUV
Kathleen McPhaul, University of Maryland
#ICFUST
#ICFUST2023

[2] (First shout to Balvi for the support on this one! (

Going to address health literacy. The context is the extreme importance of getting the messaging right and letting this space make the change it can

[3] Examples of health messaging that went off track from a public health messaging perspective:
mask effectiveness: they work, they worked, that message was missed. Vaccinations work, but the term "break through" diminished (as opposed to "saving lives, decreasing illness, etc"

[4]Refusal to message airborne transmission or ventilation/air cleaning. The "lay public" is made up of lots of people, including hospital disease control experts who still present challenge in communication around air safety/new tech

[5] Takeaway 1: FIND STORIES
how did you find GUV?
my workplace GUV story
think about why you are an advocate in this space

[6] Now she shares her story: Don Milton, a trusted messenger, called her out of retirement. He said something extremely convincing: "you'll be working in the room with all the PPE you could need AND a layer of engineering control (GUV)."

[7] So compelled that now shes running the GUV Public Acceptance Research Design.
Dive into lit., review what is commonly encountered, about the tech on the web, moving towards key informant interviews and focus groups, stratified by understanding of and familiarity with the tech

[8] Using a health and science literacy lens. Why?
Predicts health outcomes. health literacy is not just understanding what you're hearing but having direct and actionable access to this information

[9] This is really an equity framework most Americans have both low health and low science literacy (88% of Americans demonstrate below proficient level).

[10] Formative questions:
-how clear are current GUV informational sites
-what do people actually know about GUV? how does this vary by demographics/identities/ communities?
Where do people get info? why? who do they trust?
What informational tools do we have?

[11] Web content analysis. Methods:
6 student researchers: google search term, categorize websites by domain (.gov, .com,. org,. edu), initial focus on public health sites, researchers intentionally naive to GUV), used the CDC "Clear Communication Index" to evaluate.

[12] Government agencies are legally obligated to communicate to the public in language they can understand. CCI developed by CDC to aid in guidance
Government messaging varied from scores in the 20s to the 90s out of 100

[13] CDC UVGI site the only 90 percentile score
CCI scores went down when scorers were asked to evaluate only of GUV clarity
next round of project: scoring non-governemental site

[14] Columbia site leading so far good graphics to support chunked, manageable, understandable text help people with both numbers and actionable suggestions

[15] The team is also in the midst of a literature review. Focusing on the messages learned from failed public health messaging during pandemic. One lit study showed that traditional media is better monitored and regulated but people turned to social media.

[16] Another study examines an extended group of women in science referring questions, researching, and answering together. interesting study in fostering trust.

[17] Intentionally tackled the "infodemic" head on and explicitly very specific messages targeted to individual questions and questioners. Gallup poll of trusted messengers for medical and health info:
doctors and nurses have always scored very high, but that is changing.

[18] People trust those in their communities.Intersting use of community librarians, salon workers, and barbers as public health messaging touchpoints to answer this gulf. There is a growing movement of scientists combattin science skepticism, misinformation, and disinformation.

[19] The media also holds great power in this sphere: we need to understand it and put people who are comfortable, trained, and invested in communicating with the media into those points of contact

[20] The media also holds great power in this sphere: we need to understand it and put people who are comfortable, trained, and invested in communicating with the media into those points of contact

[21] Takeaways: have a clear main message and call to action
Language: be specific and intentional
information design: ??
state of the science: who are the scientists? what are the groups? what is the story?
behavioral recommendations: be clear

[22] Numbers: don't make people do their own calculations risk: needs clarity of communication in balance with benefit. Consider attaching certifications, endorsements, media touchpoints, reviews.

[23]Q: Certain terminology seems to hurt us (i.e. "radiation") and i worry that the extremely negative associations, restrictive regulations will hinder us. should we develop new language? GE acquired MRI arm, they made a move away from word "Nuclear"

[24]
A: worked with the depleted uranium project in the 90s, well aware of polarizing and upsetting terminology. "Irradiation "and "germicidal" both absolutely need study, but also certain terms, acronyms, etc become comfortable vernacular over time