Planning and implementation efficacy as a determinant of health risk communication outcomes: Case studies of the U.S. Public Health Service (PHS)

This study was conducted under the auspices of the Subcommittee on Risk Communication and Education of the Committee to Coordinate Environmental Health and Related Programs (CCEHRP) to determine how Public Health Service (PHS) agencies are communicating information about health risk, what factors contributed to effective communication efforts, and what specific principles, strategies, and practices best promote more effective health risk communication outcomes.^ Member agencies of the Subcommittee submitted examples of health risk communication activities or decisions they perceived to be effective and some examples of cases they thought had not been as effective as desired. Of the 10 case studies received, 7 were submitted as examples of effective health risk communication, and 3, as examples of less effective communication.^ Information contained in the 10 case studies describing the respective agencies' health risk communication strategies and practices was compared with EPA's Seven Cardinal Rules of Risk Communication, since similar rules were not found in any PHS agency. EPA's rules are: (1) Accept and involve the public as a legitimate partner. (2) Plan carefully and evaluate your efforts. (3) Listen to the public's specific concerns. (4) Be honest, frank, and open. (5) Coordinate and collaborate with other credible sources. (6) Meet the needs of the media. (7) Speak clearly and with compassion.^ On the basis of case studies analysis, the Subcommittee, in their attempts to design and implement effective health risk communication campaigns, identified a number of areas for improvement among the agencies. First, PHS agencies should consider developing a focus specific to health risk communication (i.e., office or specialty resource). Second, create a set of generally accepted practices and guidelines for effective implementation and evaluation of PHS health risk communication activities and products. Third, organize interagency initiatives aimed at increasing awareness and visibility of health risk communication issues and trends within and between PHS agencies.^ PHS agencies identified some specific implementation strategies the CCEHRP might consider pursuing to address the major recommendations. Implementation strategies common to PHS agencies emerged in the following five areas: (1) program development, (2) building partnerships, (3) developing training, (4) expanding information technologies, and (5) conducting research and evaluation. ^

Folklore, fad, and fashion: The concept of misconduct in science redefined

This study is an analytical investigation of the nature and implications of the current conceptions of scientific misconduct, arguing that the question of what constitutes misconduct in science is significantly more complex than what conventionally has been believed. Complicating the definitions of misconduct are the differences between professional science and non-scientific professions, in their respective norms of what constitutes valid knowledge, and what counts as appropriate and inappropriate practice. While institutionalized science claims that there is clear differentiation between its standards of validity and those of the non-scientific professions, this paper argues that, when it comes to misconduct, the perceived boundaries between the scientific and non-scientific professions are breached; the practice standards that science currently employs in self-policing misconduct have come to resemble the minimal juridical standards of practice that other professions employ. This study attempts, despite erosion of these traditional boundaries, to move from legalistic standards of scientific practice to intramural standards of practice, and in so doing, to hold scientific practice to a higher standard than ordinary public conduct. The result is a clearer understanding of scientific misconduct to aid those individual scientists who are required to make onerous determinations about the appropriateness of specific practices by their peers. ^

Texas Health & Safety Code, Section 165.002 - Right to Breastfeed in Texas

The language used in Section 165.002 of the Texas Health and Safety Code renders breastfeeding women vulnerable and susceptible to harassment, discrimination, and persecution via the Texas Penal Code, Sec. 30.05 (Criminal Trespassing), Sec. 21.08 (Indecent Exposure), and Sec. 21.22 (Indecency with a Child). ^ The overall goal of this paper is to develop a solution to this problem via a proposed law or legislative action that offers protection and support for breastfeeding women who choose to nurse in public. Data to inform these recommendations were collected through a literature review and structured interviews with several breastfeeding stakeholders. A literature review of state and federal breastfeeding legislation was conducted to compare and contrast differences between existing legislation in the United States. Interviews were conducted with breastfeeding legislation stakeholders, which included state legislators who have been active in breastfeeding legislation, breastfeeding mothers, and representatives from the Central Texas Healthy Mothers Healthy Babies Coalition (Centex HMHB Coalition), Texas Breastfeeding Coalition (TXBF coalition), La Leche League International, and the Texas Business Association. Data from the literature and legislation reviews and interviews were transcribed and examined for common themes using qualitative data techniques. ^ Overall, most of the stakeholders came to a general consensus on three points, (1) breastfeeding women are supported by stakeholders within the community, (2) other legislation or penal codes should not override the right to breastfeed, and (3) the current breastfeeding legislation needs to be improved to adequately support breastfeeding women. The interviews with breastfeeding legislation stakeholders yielded two major recommendations for the improvement of Section 165.002 of the Texas Health and Safety Code: advocacy efforts to change the wording of the legislation and education to inform people about the legislation. ^ The right to breastfeed is an important public health issue in that it provides a host of health benefits for mothers and children, and is more economical and environmentally superior to alternative feeding methods. While breastfeeding in public is not illegal nor ever has been, adequate legislation is important to affirm this right for women so that they can confidently feed their children without embarrassment or harassment.^

Bioterrorism preparedness at a hospital level in the Southwest Region of the United States -- A systematic review

Since the tragic events of September, 11 2001 the United States bioterrorism and disaster preparedness has made significant progress; yet, numerous research studies of nationwide hospital emergency response have found alarming shortcomings in surge capacity and training level of health care personnel in responding to bioterrorism incidents. The primary goals of this research were to assess hospital preparedness towards the threat of bioterrorist agents in the Southwest Region of the United States and provide recommendations for its improvement. Since little formal research has been published on the hospital preparedness of Oklahoma, Arizona, Texas and New Mexico, this research study specifically focused on the measurable factors affecting the respective states' resources and level of preparedness, such as funding, surge capacity and preparedness certification status.^ Over 300 citations of peer-reviewed articles and 17 Web sites were reviewed, of which 57 reports met inclusion criteria. The results of the systematic review highlighted key gaps in the existing literature and the key targets for future research, as well as identified strengths and weaknesses of the hospital preparedness in the Southwest states compared to the national average. ^ Based on the conducted research, currently, the Southwest states hospital systems are unable fully meet presidential preparedness mandates for emergency and disaster care: the staffed beds to 1,000 population value fluctuated around 1,5 across the states; funding for the hospital preparedness lags behind hospital costs by millions of dollars; and public health-hospital partnership in bioterrorism preparedness is quite weak as evident in lack of joint exercises and training. However, significant steps towards it are being made, including on-going hospital preparedness certification by the Joint Commission of Health Organization. Variations in preparedness levels among states signify that geographic location might determine a hospital level of bioterrorism preparedness as well, tending to favor bigger states such as Texas.^ Suggested recommendations on improvement of the hospital bioterrorism preparedness are consistent with the existing literature and include establishment and maintenance of solid partnerships between hospitals and public health agencies, conduction of joint exercises and drills for the health care personnel and key partners, improved state and federal funding specific to bioterrorism preparedness objectives, as well as on-going training of the clinical personnel on recognition of the bioterrorism agents.^

Negotiated settlements: The utilities, multiple regulators and clean air

Utilities have made strides in reducing air pollutant levels, but the proposed 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments call for even greater reductions and more stringent enforcement. Federal and state air enforcement agencies now encourage the use of negotiated settlements as a way to bring about compliance. This research examines the operation of such procedures in 19 case studies and a formal survey with the negotiators to account for the differences in the nature of the settlements and to identify the factors contributing to their perceived success. ^