Accepted for/Published in: Journal of Medical Internet Research
Date Submitted: Apr 6, 2022
Date Accepted: Jul 19, 2022
Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.
Evaluating the effectiveness of Internet-based communication for public health: a systematic review
ABSTRACT
Background:
Communicating strategically is a key issue for health organisations. Over the past decade, healthcare communication via social media and websites has generated a great deal of studies, examining different realities of communication strategies. When it comes to systematic reviews, there is, however, fragmentary evidence on this type of communication.
Objective:
The aim of this systematic review was to summarise the evidence on Web institutional health communication for public health authorities to evaluate possible aim-specific key points based on these existing studies.
Methods:
Guided by the PRISMA statement, we conducted a comprehensive review across two electronic databases (PubMed and Web of Science) from January 2011 until 7 October 2021, searching for studies investigating institutional health communication. Two independent researchers reviewed the articles for inclusion, and assessment of methodological quality was based on the Kmet appraisal checklist.
Results:
Seventy-eight articles were selected. Most of the studies targeted health promotion/disease prevention (n=35), followed by crisis communication (n=24), general health (n=13), and misinformation correction/health promotion (n=6). Engagement and message framing were the most analysed aspects. Few studies focused on campaign effectiveness. Only 18 studies had an experimental design. Kmet evaluation was used in order to distinguish studies presenting a solid structure from lacking studies. In particular, considering the 0·75-point threshold, out of 74 studies, 28 were excluded (37·8% of the total). Studies above this threshold were used to identify a series of aim-specific and medium-specific suggestions, as communication strategies employed differ quite greatly.
Conclusions:
Overall, findings suggest that no single strategy works best in the case of Web-based healthcare communication. The extreme variability of outcomes and the lack of a unitary measure for assessing the end-points of a specific campaign or study leads us to reconsider the tools we use to evaluate the efficacy of Web-based health communication.
Citation
Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.
Copyright
© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.