Woodruff Katie, Berglas Nancy, Herold Stephanie, Roberts Sarah C M
Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences; University of California, San Francisco.
Health Commun. 2023 Jan;38(1):61-70. doi: 10.1080/10410236.2021.1932109. Epub 2021 Jun 1.
Given the politicization of abortion, professionals working in U.S. health departments (HDs) may not be receptive to communications about abortion, despite often regulating abortion facilities. This paper reports results of a randomized, prospective, observational study to test the effects of e-mail language when disseminating evidence on abortion to HD professionals. Our sample was 302 HD employees who oversee healthcare facilities inspection/regulation in all 50 U.S. state HDs, clustered by HD and randomized into two study groups. In November-December 2019, we sent biweekly e-mails containing links to a website summarizing evidence on abortion facility regulation. E-mails/headers sent to one group emphasized public health values and did not include the word abortion; e-mails/headers to the other group used the word abortion. Primary outcome measures were e-mail open rates and click-through rates. Among 221 participants to whom e-mails were deliverable, the overall open rate was 36%. Open rate was 25% for PH values and 46% for abortion groups ( < .05). Effects were moderated by state abortion policy environment: in both supportive and restrictive environments, participants in the abortion messaging group were statistically more likely to open e-mails than those in the PH values group. There was no difference between groups in states with middle-ground abortion policy environments. Among participants opening at least one e-mail, 19% clicked through to the website, with no significant difference by group. This study demonstrates that repeated targeted e-mail campaigns can reach HD professionals with research summaries. Concerns that communications to HDs should avoid the word abortion are unsupported.
鉴于堕胎问题的政治化,在美国卫生部门(HDs)工作的专业人员可能对有关堕胎的信息不感兴趣,尽管他们经常对堕胎设施进行监管。本文报告了一项随机、前瞻性观察性研究的结果,以测试在向卫生部门专业人员传播堕胎相关证据时电子邮件语言的效果。我们的样本是302名美国50个州卫生部门中负责监督医疗设施检查/监管的员工,按卫生部门进行聚类,并随机分为两个研究组。在2019年11月至12月期间,我们每两周发送一封电子邮件,其中包含一个网站的链接,该网站总结了堕胎设施监管的证据。发送给一组的电子邮件/标题强调公共卫生价值,不包含“堕胎”一词;发送给另一组的电子邮件/标题使用了“堕胎”一词。主要结果指标是电子邮件的打开率和点击率。在可接收电子邮件的221名参与者中,总体打开率为36%。公共卫生价值组的打开率为25%,堕胎组为46%(P<0.05)。州堕胎政策环境对结果有调节作用:在支持性和限制性环境中,堕胎信息组的参与者在统计学上比公共卫生价值组的参与者更有可能打开电子邮件。在堕胎政策处于中间立场的州,两组之间没有差异。在至少打开一封电子邮件的参与者中,19%点击进入了网站,两组之间没有显著差异。这项研究表明,重复进行有针对性的电子邮件宣传活动可以将研究摘要传达给卫生部门的专业人员。认为向卫生部门传达信息应避免使用“堕胎”一词的担忧是没有根据的。