Abstract

Pandemic health emergencies require timely awareness by credible information and trust in the operational system to inform, instruct, promote protective behaviour, and dismantle rumours to mitigate the impact, particularly in the absence of a vaccine during this current COVID-19 situation. Various government and non-government organizations generated an overwhelming number of communication materials (infodemic) for diverse populations around pandemic related practices. However, access to and utility of communication materials have been limited for the vulnerable populations due to social determinants of health such as linguistic or technology barriers as well as trust on communicated messages.

A systematic review was conducted in June-September of 2020 adopting a scoping review framework and PRISMA-ScR model. Collecting primary data from conveniently selected relevant service providers or policy planners during the COVID-19 pandemic followed this. Social determinants of health as social marginalization and health-related complexities were found to be associated with the vulnerability of the COVID-19 pandemic. Key factors that were identified as determinants included socio-cultural attributes, language barrier, lack of trust towards public health interventions, structural and personal factors, and lack of equity-informed planning of communication strategies.

The findings from the study informed the design of an equity-informed communication preparedness and strategy framework, which meant a participatory and inclusive process of planning and implementing emergency risk communication materials that aimed at reducing the barriers and in turn reducing the vulnerability of subgroups. The preparedness plan anticipates the limitations of the communication materials from an end-user perspective and reinforces the desirable practices for prevention. The strategy suggests a mode of communication for reaching out to people who are at risk to ensure increased efficacy and creating a support system to access information and act upon the recommendations. This 360-degree-approach framework emphasized the active participation of the target audience from the beginning of the process of communication material design for the pandemic.

Keywords: Infodemic; COVID-19; Vulnerable Community; Language Barrier; Accessible Communication

References

1. World Health Organization. Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) Pandemic (2020).
2. Dorn AV., et al. “COVID-19 exacerbating inequalities in the US”. The Lancet 10232 (2020): 1243-1244.
3. Martin D. “Employee safety goes beyond hand-washing, distancing; farm management is feeling the ever-shifting realities brought on by COVID-19. Ontario Farmer (2020).
4. Ogilvie M. “Rural, northern hospitals brace for COVID-19 challenge: Already stretched thin, health-care workers fear just a small number of cases could overwhelm facilities 'we are preparing to be clinically overrun with sick patients with no other local resources to turn to'. Toronto Star (2020).
5. Bouye K., et al. “Pandemic Influenza preparedness and response among public-housing residents, single-parent families, and low-income populations”. American Journal of Public HealthS2 (2009): S287-S293.
6. Creatura D. “New ICES report shows immigrants, refugees and other newcomers account for nearly 44% of all COVID-19 cases in Ontario. ICES, Toronto (2020).
7. World Health Organization (Sep 23, 2020). COVID-19 pandemic: countries urged to take stronger action to stop spread of harmful information (2020).
8. Grant MJ and Booth A. “A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies”. Health Information and Libraries Journal2 (2009): 91-108.
9. Arksey H and O'Malley L. “Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework”. International Journal of Social Research Methodology 1 (2005): 19-32.
10. Tricco AC., et al. “PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation”. Annals of Internal Medicine 169 (2018): 467-473.
11. Communicating During an Outbreak or Public Health Investigation (2020).
12. Vaughan E and Tinker T. “Effective health risk communication about pandemic influenza for vulnerable populations”. American Journal of Public Health2.2 (2009): S324-S332.
13. Kreps GL and Sparks L. “Meeting the health literacy needs of immigrant populations”. Patient Education and Counseling 3 (2008): 328-332.
14. Truman BI., et al. “Pandemic Influenza Preparedness and response among immigrants and refugees”. American Journal of Public Health2 (2009): S278-286.
15. Mirza T. “Refugee girls face a triple crisis with COVID-19”. Canada News Wire (2020).
16. Why COVID-clusters on the edge of town: Some 16 neighbourhoods with Toronto's highest infection rates are located in the northwest corner of the city. Community advocates say the pandemic has only magnified existing problems like crowded housing, vulnerable workers and harder-to-access to health care”. Toronto Star (2020).
17. Calla D. “COVID-19 and the Social Determinants of Health. Presentation at TPH Consultation with Citywide Cluster”. Toronto Public Health (2020).
18. O'Sullivan, Tracey and Bourgoin, Maxime. Vulnerability in an Influenza Pandemic: Looking Beyond Medical Risk (2020).
19. Bavel JJV., et al. “Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response (2020).
20. Rachel L. “People are hoarding supplies as COVID-19 spreads – but why? And is it useful? An expert weighs in’, CTV News Montreal Digital Reporter.
21. Aday LA. “Health status of vulnerable populations”. Annual Review of Public Health1 (1994): 487-509.
22. Shi L and Stevens G. “Vulnerability and unmet health care needs: The influence of multiple risk factors”. Journal of General Internal Medicine2 (2005): 148-154.
23. Garoon JP and Duggan PS. “Discourses of disease, discourses of disadvantage: A critical analysis of National Pandemic Influenza Preparedness Plans”. Social Science and Medicine7 (2008): 1133-1142.
24. Campbell VA., et al. “Preparing for and responding to pandemic influenza: Implications for people with disabilities”. American Journal of Public Health2 (2009): S294-S300.
25. Whitten P., et al. “An examination into audience targeting and the use of storytelling or statistical evidence on breast cancer websites”. Patient Education and Counselling2 (2011): e59-e64.
26. Croft DR and Peterson MW. “An evaluation of the quality and contents of asthma education on the world wide web”. Chest 4 (2002): 1301-1307.
27. Wilson FL., et al. “An analysis of the readability and cultural sensitivity of information on the national cancer institute's website: Cancer Net”. Oncology Nursing Forum9 (2000): 1403.
28. Mich L., et al. “Evaluating and designing web site quality”. IEEE Multimedia1 (2003): 34-43.
29. General Services Administration, Dept. of Health and Human Services, and United States (2006). Research-based web design and usability guidelines. Washington, D.C: U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services (2006).
30. Farmer BM. “Anthony Fauci talks with Dr Jon LaPook about COVID-19”. CB Cnews (2020).
31. Shore DA. “Communicating in times of uncertainty: The need for trust”. Journal of Health Communication 1 (2003): 13-14.
32. Fremitus VS., et al. “Trust during the early stages of the 2009 H1N1 pandemic”. Journal of Health Communication3 (2013): 321-339.
33. Reynolds B and Quinn SC. “Effective communication during an influenza pandemic: The value of using a crisis and emergency risk communication framework”. Health Promotion Practice4 (2008): 13S-17S.
34. Quinn SC., et al. “Exploring communication, trust in government, and vaccination intention later in the 2009 H1N1 pandemic: results of a national survey”. Biosecurity and Bioterrorism: Biodefense Strategy, Practice, and Science2 (2013): 96-106.
35. DeBruin D., et al. “Social justice in pandemic preparedness”. American Journal of Public Health4 (2012): 586-591.
36. Gostin LO. “Why should we care about social justice?” Hastings Center Report4 (2007): 3-3.
37. Irwin A., et al. “The commission on social determinants of health: Tackling the social roots of health inequities”. PLoS Medicine6 (2006): e106.
38. World Health Organization. Ethical considerations in developing a public health response to pandemic influenza (2020) (2007).
39. United Nation. Covid-19 and human rights: We are all in this together (2020).