A health campaign is a type of media campaign which attempts to promote public health by making new health interventions available. The organizers of a health campaign frequently use education along with an opportunity to participate further, such as when a vaccination campaign seeks both to educate the public about a vaccine and provide the vaccine to people who want it. When a health campaign has international relevance it may be called a global health campaign.

Examples

Health education

Many diseases and medical problems have a "health education campaign" or "awareness campaign" associated with them. The goal of such a campaign is to make people conscious of the impact of diseases and to provide them information about the disease if they want to learn more about it.

Eradication of infectious diseases

Various health campaigns have taken the goal of eradicating infectious diseases. In such campaigns the organizers recruit the public to participate in the campaign by talking about it with others and encouraging others to participate.

Behavior modification campaign

An organization may create a campaign which asks for participants to change their behavior in some way. Examples of such projects are smoking cessation campaigns which ask people to quit smoking, HIV prevention campaigns which ask people to do things such as use condoms to reduce HIV infection risk, or exercise campaigns which encourage people to engage in physical activity for health.

Organizations as campaigns

In some cases the work of an organization may itself be a health campaign. This may happen when, for example, an organization exists to provide health information or medical resources to anyone who requests them. The organization itself may conduct a series of health campaigns, and its entire operation may be called a health campaign.

Health Campaign Design: ACME Framework

The Audience-Channel-Message-Evaluation (ACME) framework provides integrated guidance for effective health communication campaign design, implementation, and evaluation.[1] The ACME framework suggests four principles to follow when developing a health communication campaign: 1) audience segmentation, 2) channel selection, 3) theory-based message design, and 4) outcome evaluation. The four principles are interconnected in guiding every decision point over the course of health campaign development. For instance, audience segmentation implies channel selection, message design, and evaluation plans.  Message design additionally determines channel selection and vice versa. Evaluation is carried out through the whole campaign development and implementation rather than a one-time, separate assessment.

Audience (who?)

The first principle to consider when developing an effective campaign is to identify the target audience. The procedure is also known as audience segmentation, which refers to a step narrowing down a homogenous audience to a heterogenous audience that shares similar patterns of beliefs, behaviors, and values.[2] Segmentation strategies could be as broad as focusing on demographic or geographic characteristics such as gender and location. Yet it could also be as specific as dividing groups based on shared attitudes toward a given object (e.g., positive attitudes toward a promoted health behavior) or similar behaviors (e.g., performing healthy eating behaviors).  

For instance, guided by the Risk Perception Attitude framework (RPA),[3] people can be segmented into four attitudinal groups based on their risk perception and self-efficacy, including responsive group (high risk, high efficacy), avoidance group (high risk, low efficacy), proactive group (low risk, high efficacy), and indifference group (low risk, low efficacy). Putting into a health promotion context aiming for increasing young adults’ use of genetic tests. Young adults can be further segmented into four groups based on their genetic risk and efficacy beliefs.[4] Those who have a high-risk perception toward genetic diseases and believe in engaging in self-protective health behaviors can protect their genes belong to the group of activists (i.e., responsive group in RPA). Those who have a high-risk perception toward genetic diseases but do not believe they have the ability to protect their genes by engaging in health behaviors belong to the threatened group (i.e., avoidance group in RPA). Those who believe in the positive impact of health behaviors on genes but do not feel at risk of genetic diseases belong to the group of controllers (i.e., proactive group in RPA). Lastly, those who are not aware of the risk of genetic diseases yet the benefit of health behaviors belong to the group of skeptics (i.e., indifferent group in RPA). Depending on how the audience is segmented, campaign designers can tailor more specific messages and deliver the messages via the most appropriate channel to the targeted group.

Channel (how?)

The principle of channel selection determines the effectiveness of campaign implementation.[1] The key underlying question here is how to reach the target audience defined by the first principle (audience segmentation) and how to ensure the campaign messages can be viewed by the intended group of people with multiple exposures. Broadly, communication channels can be selected from two categories: interpersonal or computer-mediated communication channels. Additionally, communication channels can differ in small features such as access, reach, specialization, depth, and credibility. For example, television and print media are two distinct channels differing in access and specialization. As technology continues to advance the media landscape, digital channels such as social media or other interactive tools can also be included in the considerations.[5] With wide choices of channel selection, multi-channel dissemination can be more desirable and effective than single channel.[6] The length of delivery time on the chosen channels is another decision needed to be considered in this process.[1]

Message (what?)

The principle of message design is guided by audience segmentation and behavioral theories.[1] When specific characteristics of the target audience are in mind, campaign designers have more room to tailor the message to be personally relevant and thus increase persuasiveness. Behavioral theories can help campaign designers to recognize the underlying behavioral determinants that are in need of change to realize the campaign goal. Guided by theories, messages can be designed to embody those latent behavioral determinants to better secure the success of the campaign in changing a specific behavior.  

For instance, according to Extended Parallel Process Model (EPPM), people are more likely to adapt their behaviors when they have a high perceived threat and high perceived efficacy to avoid the threat.[7] Messages thus can be designed to elicit individuals’ perceptions of threat and efficacy. Putting into AIDS education context,[8] messages can embody threat by emphasizing the severity of HIV infection such as showing graphic photographs of late-stage AIDS victims and vividly describing the health consequences. To elicit perceived efficacy, messages can highlight the effectiveness of using condoms to reduce the risk of HIV transmission and the ease of using condoms.

Evaluation (did it work?)

The principle of evaluation in the ACME framework emphasizes conducting a set of assessments, rather than a one-time, separate process.[1]  It refers to three aspects of evaluation: 1) formative evaluation, 2) process evaluation, and 3) outcome evaluation. Formative evaluation focuses on evaluating the initial campaign design, examining whether audience segmentation, message design, and channel selection are clear and interconnected. Process evaluation concerns the effectiveness of campaign implementation, ensuring the campaign’s reach and exposure to the intended audiences. Outcome evaluation examines the success of a campaign in achieving intended effects while ruling out unintended effects.

See also

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 Noar, Seth M. (2011-03-24). "An Audience–Channel–Message–Evaluation (ACME) Framework for Health Communication Campaigns". Health Promotion Practice. 13 (4): 481–488. doi:10.1177/1524839910386901. ISSN 1524-8399. PMID 21441207. S2CID 36517676.
  2. ↑ Slater, M. D. (1996). Theory and Method in Health Audience Segmentation. Journal of Health Communication, 1(3), 267–284. doi:10.1080/108107396128059
  3. ↑ Rimal, R. N. and Real, K. (2003). Perceived Risk and Efficacy Beliefs as Motivators of Change.: Use of the Risk Perception Attitude (RPA) Framework to Understand Health Behaviors. Human Communication Research, 29(3), 370–399. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2003.tb00844.x
  4. ↑ Smith, Rachel A.; Greenberg, Marisa; Parrott, Roxanne L. (2014-05-28). "Segmenting by Risk Perceptions: Predicting Young Adults' Genetic-Belief Profiles with Health and Opinion-Leader Covariates". Health Communication. 29 (5): 483–493. doi:10.1080/10410236.2013.768475. ISSN 1041-0236. PMC 4062443. PMID 24111749.
  5. ↑ Willoughby, Jessica Fitts; Noar, Seth M. (2022-06-03). "Fifteen Years after a 10-year Retrospective: The State of Health Mass Mediated Campaigns". Journal of Health Communication. 27 (6): 362–374. doi:10.1080/10810730.2022.2110627. ISSN 1081-0730. PMID 35950540. S2CID 251495191.
  6. ↑ McCormack, L., Sheridan, S., Lewis, M., Boudewyns, V., Melvin, C. L., Kistler, C., and Lohr, K. N. (2013). Communication and dissemination strategies to facilitate the use of health-related evidence. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.
  7. ↑ Witte, K. (1992). Putting the fear back into fear appeals: The extended parallel process model. Communications Monographs, 59(4), 329-349.
  8. ↑ Witte, K. (1994). Fear control and danger control: A test of the extended parallel process model (EPPM). Communications Monographs, 61(2), 113-134.

Sources

  • World Health Organization (2009). Public health campaigns : getting the message across. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization. ISBN 978-9240560277.
  • Maibach, Edward; Parrott, Roxanne Louiselle (1995). Designing health messages : approaches from communication theory and public health practice. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications. ISBN 978-0803953987.
  • Atkin, editors, Ronald E. Rice, Charles K. (2013). Public communication campaigns (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, Calif.: SAGE. ISBN 978-1412987707. {{cite book}}: |first1= has generic name (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  • Wallack, Lawrence; Woodruff, Katie; Dorfman, Lori (1999). News for a change : an advocate's guide to working with the media. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. ISBN 978-0761919247.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.