The Ebola communication crisis of 2014 generated widespread fear and attention among Western news media, social media users, and members of the United States (US) public. Health communicators need more information on misinformation and the social media environment during a fear-inducing disease outbreak to improve communication practices. The purpose of this study was to describe the content of Ebola-related tweets with a specific focus on misinformation, political content, health related content, risk framing, and rumors.We examined tweets from a random 1% sample of all tweets published September 30th - October 30th, 2014, filtered for English-language tweets mentioning "Ebola" in the content or hashtag, that had at least 1 retweet (N = 72,775 tweets). A randomly selected subset of 3639 (5%) tweets were evaluated for inclusion. We analyzed the 3113 tweets that meet inclusion criteria using public health trained human coders to assess tweet characteristics (joke, opinion, discord), veracity (true, false, partially false), political context, risk frame, health context, Ebola specific messages, and rumors. We assessed the proportion of tweets with specific content using descriptive statistics and chi-squared tests.Of non-joke tweets, 10% of Ebola-related tweets contained false or partially false information. Twenty-five percent were related to politics, 28% contained content that provoked reader response or promoted discord, 42% contained risk elevating messages and 72% were related to health. The most frequent rumor mentioned focused on government conspiracy. When comparing tweets with true information to tweets with misinformation, a greater percentage of tweets with misinformation were political in nature (36% vs 15%) and contained discord-inducing statements (45% vs 10%). Discord-inducing statements and political messages were both significantly more common in tweets containing misinformation compared with those without(p < 0.001).Results highlight the importance of anticipating politicization of disease outbreaks, and the need for policy makers and social media companies to build partnerships and develop response frameworks in advance of an event. While each public health event is different, our findings provide insight into the possible social media environment during a future epidemic and could help optimize potential public health communication strategies.
Since 2001, the United States government has spent substantial resources on preparing the nation against a bioterrorist attack. Earlier articles in this series have analyzed civilian biodefense funding by the federal government for fiscal years (FY) 2001 through proposed funding for FY2012. This article updates those figures with budgeted amounts for FY2013, specifically analyzing the budgets and allocations for civilian biodefense at the Departments of Health and Human Services, Defense, Homeland Security, Agriculture, Commerce, and State; the Environmental Protection Agency; and the National Science Foundation. As in previous years, our analysis indicates that the majority (>90%) of the "biodefense" programs included in the FY2013 budget have both biodefense and non-biodefense goals and applications-that is, programs to improve infectious disease research, public health and hospital preparedness, and disaster response more broadly. Programs that focus solely on biodefense represent a small proportion (<10%) of our analysis, as the federal agencies continue to prioritize all-hazards preparedness. For FY2013, the federal budget for programs focused solely on civilian biodefense totals $574.2 million, and the budget for programs with multiple goals and applications, including biodefense, is $4.96 billion, for an overall total of $5.54 billion.
In this paper, we present a research agenda for longitudinal risk communication during a global pandemic. Starting from an understanding that traditional approaches to risk communication for epidemics, crises, and disasters have focused on short-duration events, we acknowledge the limitations of existing theories, frameworks, and models for both research and practice in a rapidly changing communication environment. We draw from scholarship in communication, sociology, anthropology, public health, emergency management, law, and technology to identify research questions that are fundamental to the communication challenges that have emerged under the threat of COVID-19. We pose a series of questions focused around 5 topics, then offer a catalog of prior research to serve as points of departure for future research efforts. This compiled agenda offers guidance to scholars engaging in practitioner-informed research and provides risk communicators with a set of substantial research questions to guide future knowledge needs.
The Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security is working to analyze and deepen scientific dialogue regarding potential global catastrophic biological risks (GCBRs), in a continuation of its mission to reduce the consequences of epidemics and disasters. Because GCBRs constitute an emerging policy concern and area of practice, we have developed a framework to guide our work. We invited experts from a variety of disciplines to engage with our underlying concepts and assumptions to refine collective thinking on GCBRs and thus advance protections against them.
Mosquito-borne infectious diseases such as dengue, chikungunya, and now Zika, pose a public health threat to the US, particularly Florida, the Gulf Coast states, and Hawaii. Recent autochthonous transmission of dengue and chikungunya in Florida, the recent dengue outbreak in Hawaii, and the potential for future local spread of Zika in the US, has led to the consideration of novel approaches to mosquito management. One such novel approach, the release of sterile genetically modified mosquitoes, has been proposed as a possible intervention, and a trial release of GM mosquitoes is being considered in one Florida community. However, this proposal has been controversial. The objective of this research was to increase understanding of community knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs regarding mosquito control and GM mosquitoes. An 18-question self-administered survey was mailed to all households in the identified Key West, Florida neighborhood where a GM mosquito trial has been proposed. This survey was fielded between July 20, 2015 and November 1, 2015. The main outcome variable was opposition to the use of GM mosquitoes. Measures included demographic information and opinions on mosquitoes, mosquito control, and vector-borne diseases. A majority of survey respondents did not support use of GM mosquitoes as a mosquito control method.Reasons for opposition included general fears about possible harmful impacts of this intervention, specific worries about human and animal health impacts from the GM mosquitoes, and environmental concerns about potential negative effects on the ecosystem. Residents were more likely to oppose GM mosquito use if they had a low perception of the potential risks posed by diseases like dengue and chikungunya, if they were female, and if they were less concerned about the need to control mosquitoes in general. These findings suggest a need for new approaches to risk communication, including educational efforts surrounding mosquito control and reciprocal dialogue between residents and public health officials.
This article is the latest in an annual series analyzing federal funding for health security programs. It examines proposed funding in the President's Budget Request for FY2018 and provides updated amounts for FY2017 and actual funding for FY2010 through FY2016. The proposed FY2018 budget for health security–related programs represents a significant decrease in funding from prior years and previous administrations. In total, the President's proposed FY2018 budget includes $12.45 billion for health security–related programs, an estimated decrease in funding of $1.25 billion, or 9%, from the estimated $13.71 billion in FY2017 and an 11% decrease from the FY2016 actual funding level of $13.99 billion. Most FY2018 health security funding ($6.67 billion, 54%) would go to programs with multiple-hazard and preparedness goals and missions, representing a 14% decrease in this funding compared to FY2017. Radiological and nuclear security programs would receive 20% ($2.48 billion) of all health security funding, a slight decrease of 2% from the prior year. Biosecurity programs would be funded at $1.53 billion (12% of health security funding) in FY2018, a decrease of 6% compared to FY2017. Chemical security programs would represent 3% ($389.7 million) of all health security funding in FY2018, a 9% decrease from the prior year. Finally, 11% of health security funding ($1.39 billion) would be dedicated to pandemic influenza and emerging infectious diseases programs, the only category of funding to see an increase (3%) above FY2017. This article is the latest in an annual series analyzing federal funding for health security programs. It examines proposed funding in the President's Budget Request for FY2018 and provides updated amounts for FY2017 and actual funding for FY2010 through FY2016. The proposed FY2018 budget for health security–related programs represents a significant decrease in funding from prior years and previous administrations.
