Make a report writing on the epidemic efforts in your area
Answers
Answer:
Evolving Outbreaks and Evolving Communication
Before an outbreak is recognized and an investigation begins, limited numbers of persons might be exposed to health risks without experiencing illness. As increasing numbers of persons are exposed to the risk or become ill, healthcare providers and others might become aware of the higher than expected number of illnesses and begin reporting the unusually high occurrences to local and state health authorities. This situation is often what prompts an outbreak investigation, and as that outbreak evolves, communications about it must evolve as well (1,2).
In today’s 24-hour news and digital media environment, people constantly receive information from many sources, ranging from print media to television to alerts and social media on mobile devices. Immediately after the news media or community learns of a public health–related outbreak investigation, they want to know what is happening and who is affected. When the cause is rare but might cause substantial harm, news outlets often treat the event as breaking news and begin sustained coverage. From the beginning of an event to its resolution and follow-up, public health authorities are expected to provide the news media with timely, accurate information and answers about the outbreak’s effects.
Because the ways in which receipt of news is evolving, the ways in which public health authorities communicate with the media and public needs to adapt in similar ways. In 2016, the Pew Research Center reported that approximately 4 in 10 US residents received their news from online sources, and 6 in 10 received their news through social media channels (3). Today, communications strategies during an outbreak response should include a mix of media outreach, partner and stakeholder outreach, and social media engagement (2).
Risk Perception and Communication
Knowing how the public or members of affected groups perceive a risk affects what you, as a field investigator, might communicate and how you frame the key messages. Many times, persons most affected by a disease outbreak or health threat perceive the risk differently from the experts who mitigate or prevent the risk. Additionally, persons perceive their own risks differently, depending on how likely they think the actual hazard will affect them personally and their beliefs about how severe the harm might be. Perceptions of health risks also are tied to the degree to which persons feel alarmed or outraged—when the event causes a high level of worry or anxiety, the risk is perceived to be at a similarly high level (4). Persons are usually more accepting of risks or feel less outrage when the risks are voluntary, under their control, have clear benefits, are naturally occurring, are generated from a trusted source, or are familiar (Table 12.1). Conversely, persons are less accepting of risks or have greater concern or anxiety when risks are imposed or created by others, controlled by others, have no clear benefit, are human-made, come from an untrusted source, or seem exotic. For example, many persons are more worried about flying in an airplane than driving a car, despite the fact that more car crashes than airplane crashes occur each year in the United States. Flying in an airplane is an event controlled by others and aligns with a risk perceived as less acceptable. The same is true for outbreaks and public health crises. Before communicating during an outbreak, think through how risk perceptions might influence the affected populations and, therefore, how you communicate about those risks. Also, keep in mind that persons will view public health recommendations and advice through a risk–benefit lens, with the same factors affecting whether they adopt a public health recommendation.
Explanation:
hope you are not the intended recipient you are not the intended