Mebane Felicia, Temin Sarah, Parvanta Claudia F
Department of Health Policy and Administration, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Public Health, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599-7411, USA.
J Health Commun. 2003;8 Suppl 1:50-82; discussion 148-51. doi: 10.1080/713851970.
Information about anthrax released by news media from October 4 to December 3, 2001, was identified, sampled, coded, and compared with information released by CDC during that period using statistical analysis. In addition, communications about two anthrax-related issues were examined in depth. The quantitative analysis showed that, overall, CDC information releases and news coverage tracked fairly closely. When weight was defined as number of mentions, both sources gave the same weight to reports of risk for the population. The news sample gave roughly half the weight as CDC to who was exposed, how people were exposed, and what role antibiotics play in preventing anthrax. The samples were widely divergent (CDC high, news sample low) for public health precautions and other details. The in-depth, qualitative analysis showed that some reporters misinterpreted information provided by CDC, but they responded to requests to clarify the issue. The findings of this study suggest ways to improve future crisis communication efforts and demonstrate how differing methods of analysis can yield substantially different conclusions.
对2001年10月4日至12月3日新闻媒体发布的有关炭疽的信息进行了识别、采样、编码,并使用统计分析方法与疾病控制与预防中心(CDC)在同一时期发布的信息进行了比较。此外,还对与两个炭疽相关问题的沟通情况进行了深入研究。定量分析表明,总体而言,疾病控制与预防中心的信息发布与新闻报道的跟踪情况相当密切。当权重定义为提及次数时,两个来源对人群风险报告的权重相同。对于哪些人暴露、人们如何暴露以及抗生素在预防炭疽中所起的作用,新闻样本给予的权重约为疾病控制与预防中心的一半。对于公共卫生预防措施和其他细节,样本差异很大(疾病控制与预防中心的权重高,新闻样本的权重低)。深入的定性分析表明,一些记者误解了疾病控制与预防中心提供的信息,但他们回应了澄清问题的请求。这项研究的结果提出了改进未来危机沟通工作的方法,并展示了不同的分析方法如何能得出截然不同的结论。