Adaptivity in Health Communication and Promotion

Adaptivity in health communication and promotionThe potential of Web 2.0 and mobile technologies

Marco BardusInstitute of Public Communication and Education

Faculty of Communication SciencesUniversità della Svizzera Italiana, USI

Pro*Doc Conference on Adaptivity in Health Communication - Ascona, September 10, 2010

Ascona, 11/9/2010Adaptivity in health communication and promotion

OverviewIntroduction

Web 2.0 and mobile technologies today Web 2.0 for health info Web 2.0 for health communication

Objectives & Research Questions

Evidence and Discussion

Conclusions, Q&A

} Background & Rationale

2


The focus of my researchNew media and technologies for behavior change(in health communication and social marketing initiatives).

Focus on:

1. “Public health messages and campaigns”

2. “telehealth applications”(Healthy People 2010)

www.healthypeople.gov/document/html/volume1/11healthcom.htm

3

http://www.healthypeople.gov/document/html/volume1/11healthcom.htm

http://www.healthypeople.gov/document/html/volume1/11healthcom.htm

Web 2.0 and mobile technologies today


Social media world

5

http://www.flowtown.com/blog/the-2010-social-networking-map?display=wide










Just a fad?

6

http://soshable.com/still-think-social-media-is-just-a-trend/










The context+400 million watch video online+350 million read blogs+300 million visit friend’s SNS pro=ile

+500 million Facebook users59% adults wirelessly online through mobile phones (Smith, 2010)

61% of American adults looks online for health information (Fox & Jones, 2009; Lenhart et al., 2010)

Primary sources: health professionals, friends or family

(Parker, 2009)}

7

Web 2.0 vs. Web 1.0

Ascona, 11/9/2010Adaptivity in health communication and promotion X

http://flickr.com/photos/popoever/234877734/

http://flickr.com/photos/popoever/234877734/

http://flickr.com/photos/lafabriquedeblogs/1193780745/

http://flickr.com/photos/lafabriquedeblogs/1193780745/

Ascona, 11/9/2010Adaptivity in health communication and promotion ”“

The concepts

Web 2.0 encompasses the idea of the Web as a platform, that harnesses collective intelligence through the sharing of information and data in a free, open-‐source way, providing a richer user experience (O’Reilly, 2005)

Social media are the social aspects of Web 2.0 applications: participation, openness, conversation,community and connectedness. (May=ield, 2008)

X

Online health information in the Web 2.0 era


Health information seekers

61% of American adults looks online for health information (Fox & Jones, 2009; Lenhart et al., 2010)

Primary sources: health professionals, friends or family

X


WebMDHealth 2.0 /

8

Mobile phones forhealth enhancement


Self-tracking, self-monitoring

10

Ascona, 11/9/2010Adaptivity in health communication and promotion 11

http://lifehacker.com/5607322/five-best-mobile-fitness-apps






Health/Medicine 2.0

Is the use of a speci]ic set of Web tools (blogs, Podcasts, tagging, search, wikis, etc) by actors in health care including doctors, patients, and scientists, using principles of open source and generation of content by users, and the power of networks in order to personalize health care, collaborate, and promote health education.

(Hughes et al., 2008)

X


iPod/iPad/iPhone apps

12

http://www.pocketanatomy.com/?page_id=100










http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zye4swvFht4







Health communication and social marketing campaigns


http://www.the84.org/








http://www.thetruth.com/






http://www.5thguy.com/






http://re3.org/

http://re3.org/

http://re3.org/

http://re3.org/

http://re3.org/

http://re3.org/

http://re3.org/

Objectives of the presentation


We know that…

People and organizations make use of social media and mobile applications.

21


But we do not know…

Why, how and with what effects?

22

Research questions


Research questions

1. What types of social media and mobile technologies are used in public health and health promotion initiatives?

2. What measures of success (or failure) could be used to assess social media effectiveness?

3. What types work best and with whom?

4. How social media could be effectively and efJiciently used in health promotion programs?

24

Why social media forhealth promotion?


The potential of social media

Increase the reach(Chou et al., 2009; Bennet & Glasgow; Evans, 2008; Uhrig et al.,2010)

Stimulate interpersonal communication about the campaign topic + generate larger behavior change (Abroms & Maibach, 2008)

Mobile public health programs(Lefebvre, 2009)

Opportunities for tailoring, and adapting to users’ preferences, habits, health history, etc.

26


Social media for health information: good or bad?

prosGood & reliable source

(Vance, Howe & Dellavalle, 2009)

Ef]icacious in attracting, retaining and engaging users

(Bennett & Galsgow, 2009)

consPrivacy of personal data

(Chou et al., 2009)

Source credibility(Eysenbach, 2007; Hu & Sundar, 2010;

Wang et al., 2008).

27

1) what types of social media applications?


Results from our scoping review

367 references retrieved

123 articles charted

40 general commentaries and editorial material recognizing the potential use in social marketing and health communication

21 social media as health professional education and training.

10: content analyses of YouTube, Facebook, MySpace.

4 articles (2 reporting the same data) explicitly mention and report the use of social media in social marketing initiatives.

29


Social media as learning tools

Types of social mediaYouTube, wikis, blogs, podcasts, mobile phones

Training health educators (Akagi, 2008; Burke & Oomen-‐Early, 2008; Burke & Snyder, 2008; Burke, Snyder, & Rager, 2009)

Clinical practitioners(Boulos, Maramba, & Wheeler, 2006; Feeney et al., 2008; Lauber, 2009)

Public health students(Goldman, Cohen, & Sheahan, 2008; Hanson et al., 2008; Kapp et al., 2009)

30


A lesson for public health

The Obama campaign set a new standard, encouraging horizontal communication, fosteringsmall acts of engagement and facilitatingin-‐person grassroots activities.

(Abroms & Lefebvre, 2009)

31


Change we can: featuring social media(1) of]icial website(2) the campaign TV channel(3) social network sites(4) mobile phones(5) unof]icial UGC materials

32

What about


Results from our scoping review

No theories or models are explicitly reported.

Only 2 studies report outcomes: quantitative outreach and outputs, i.e. website page views, nr. of viewers, registered users, “friends” and followers.

34

2) what measures of success?


Social media effectiveness

36

Open questions


Are metrics enough?What about behavior change?

What about new media effectiveness?

38

Conclusions


Setting the research agendaWe needAppropriately designed studies focusing on the effectiveness of new media on behavior.

How?By “listening” to the publics before adapting and choosing the appropriate media strategy.

By combining qualitative + quantitative research methods (i.e. online/of=line focus groups, structured interviews with the TA, formative evaluation, SWOT analysis, conversation tracking and analysis, surveys and experiments).

40

Thank you!Marco Bardus

Institute of Public Communication and Education,Faculty of Communication SciencesUniversità della Svizzera Italiana, USI

[email protected]


References (1)Abroms, L. C., & Lefebvre, C. (2009). Obama’s wired campaign: Lessons for public health communication. Journal of Health

Communication, 14(5), 415-‐423.

Abroms, L. C., & Maibach, E. W. (2008). The effectiveness of mass communication to change public behavior. Annual Review of Public Health, 29, 219-‐234.

Akagi, C. (2008). YouTube? for health education? American Journal of Health Education, 39(1), 58-‐60.

Bennett, G. G., & Galsgow, R. E. (2009). The delivery of public health interventions via the internet: Actualizing their potential. Annual Review of Public Health, 30(1), 273-‐292.

Boulos, M. N., Maramba, I., & Wheeler, S. (2006). Wikis, blogs and podcasts: A new generation of web-‐based tools for virtual collaborative clinical practice and education. BMC Medical Education, 6, 41.

Burke, S. C., & Oomen-‐Early, J. (2008). That's blog worthy: Ten ways to integrate blogging into the health education classroom. American Journal of Health Education, 39(6), 362-‐364.

Burke, S. C., Snyder, S., & Rager, R. S. (2009). An assessment of faculty usage of YouTube as a teaching resource. Internet Journal of Allied Health Sciences & Practice, 7(1), 8p.

Burke, S. C., & Snyder, S. L. (2008). YouTube: An innovative learning resource for college health education courses. International Electronic Journal of Health Education, 11, 7p.

CDC, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2009). Interactive media | CDC health marketing. Retrieved 10/5/2009, 2009, from http://www.cdc.gov/healthmarketing/ehm/interactive.hl

42


References (2)Chou, W. Y., Hunt, Y. M., Beckjord, E. B., Moser, R. P., & Hesse, B. W. (2009). Social media use in the united

states: Implications for health communication. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 11(4), e48.

Evans, W. D. (2008). Social marketing campaigns and Children’s media use. The Future of Children, 18(1), 181-‐203.

Evans, W. D., Davis, K. C., & Zhang, Y. (2008). Health communication and marketing research with new media: Case study of the parents speak up national campaign evaluation. Cases in Public Health Communication & Marketing, 2, 140-‐158.

Eysenbach, G. (2007). From intermediation to disintermediation and apomediation: New models for consumers to access and assess the credibility of health information in the age of Web2.0. Studies in Health Technology & Informatics, 129(Pt 1), 162-‐166.

Feeney, L., Reynolds, P. A., Eaton, K. A., & Harper, J. (2008). A description of the new technologies used in transforming dental education. British Dental Journal, 204(1), 19-‐28.

Fox, S., & Jones, S. (2009). The social life of health information. Washington, D.C. (US): Pew Internet & American Life Project.

Goldman, R. H., Cohen, A. P., & Sheahan, F. (2008). Using seminar blogs to enhance student participation and learning in public health school classes. American Journal of Public Health, 98(9), 1658-‐1663.

43


References (3)Hanson, C., Thackeray, R., Barnes, M., Neiger, B. L., & McIntyre, E. (2008). Integrating web 2.0 in health education preparation and practice. American Journal of Health Education, 39(3), 157-‐166. Hu, Y., & Sundar, S. S. (2010). Effects of online health sources on credibility and behavioral intentions. Communication Research, 37(1), 105-‐132. Hughes, B., Joshi, I., & Wareham, J. (2008). Health 2.0 and medicine 2.0: Tensions and controversies in the =ield. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 10(3), e23. Kapp, J. M., LeMaster, J. W., Lyon, M. B., Zhang, B., & Hosokawa, M. C. (2009). Updating public health teaching methods in the era of social media. Public Health Reports, 124(6), 775-‐777. Lauber, C. A. (2009). Using a wiki for approved clinical instructor training. Athletic Therapy Today, 14(6), 25-‐28. Lefebvre, C. (2009). Integrating cell phones and mobile technologies into public health practice: A social marketing perspective. Health Promotion Practice, 10(4), 490-‐494. Lenhart, A., Purcell, K., Smith, A., & Zickuhr, K. (2010). Social media and young adults. Washington, D.C. (US): Pew Internet & American Life Project. O’Reilly, T. (2005). What is web 2.0. design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. Retrieved 10/5/2009, 2009, from http://oreilly.com/web2/archive/what-‐is-‐web-‐20.hl

44


References (4)Parker, G. (2009). Power to the people -‐ social media tracker wave 4, july 2009 Universal McCann. May=ield, A. (Ed.). (2008). What is social media? an e-‐book http://www.icrossing.co.uk/=ileadmin/uploads/eBooks/What_is_Social_Media_iCrossing_ebook.pdf (v1.4 ed.) iCrossing. Smith, A. (2010). Mobile access 2010. Washington, D.C. (US): Pew Internet & American Life Project. Uhrig, J., Bann, C., Williams, P., & Evans, W. D. (2010). Social networking websites as a platform for disseminating social marketing interventions: An exploratory pilot study. Social Marketing Quarterly, 16(1), 2. Vance, K., Howe, W., & Dellavalle, R. P. (2009). Social internet sites as a source of public health information. Dermatologic Clinics, 27(2), 133. Wang, Z., Walther, J. B., Pingree, S., & Hawkins, R. P. (2008). Health information, credibility, homophily, and in=luence via the internet: Web sites versus discussion groups. Health Communication, 23(4), 358.

45

http://www.icrossing.co.uk/fileadmin/uploads/eBooks/What_is_Social_Media_iCrossing_ebook.pdf




Adaptivity in Health Communication and Promotion

Education

Transcript of Adaptivity in Health Communication and Promotion