Patient education and counseling · 2026
Science translation strategies to the public during health emergencies: A systematic review of RCTs.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Taba Melody, Fajardo Michael Anthony, Ferguson Eliza, Keast Rachael, Basseal Jocelyne M, McCaffery Kirsten, Bonner Carissa
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Effective science translation is essential during public health emergencies. During the COVID-19 pandemic, rapidly evolving research had to be translated to the public under challenging conditions.
OBJECTIVES: This review aimed to identify randomised trials of COVID-19 science translation strategies targeting the public and evaluated their effectiveness in improving psychological, behavioural and/or health outcomes.
METHODS: A literature search was done across PubMed, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, and PsycINFO in July 2023 and November 2024. Studies were screened and extracted according to PRISMA guidelines. Interventions reporting behavioural outcomes were coded using the Behaviour Change Technique (BCT) taxonomy and the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used to assess study quality.
RESULTS: Of 345 records screened, 48 eligible studies were included. Most were online experiments testing message framing, with a smaller number conducted in applied settings such as health professional-delivered education. Significant positive effects were reported in most studies; 30 out of 40 studies with psychological outcomes (e.g. knowledge), 28 out of 40 studies with behavioural outcomes (e.g. intention to mask). Only one study measured a health outcome, with no significant effect. Effective features commonly included video and animation formats and messages from health experts and credible sources. The most frequent BCTs were 'information about health consequences' (33 studies) and 'credible source' (19 studies). Risk of bias was low in 42 studies.
CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight a diverse range of strategies that improved outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic. Better use of behavioural science taxonomies and core outcome sets could help researchers advance the field further during future emergencies.
PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: This review provides insights for a range of stakeholders involved in science translation during emergencies (i.e. scientists and researchers, healthcare providers, health communicators and government officials) and highlights areas requiring further investigation.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023446093.
OBJECTIVES: This review aimed to identify randomised trials of COVID-19 science translation strategies targeting the public and evaluated their effectiveness in improving psychological, behavioural and/or health outcomes.
METHODS: A literature search was done across PubMed, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, and PsycINFO in July 2023 and November 2024. Studies were screened and extracted according to PRISMA guidelines. Interventions reporting behavioural outcomes were coded using the Behaviour Change Technique (BCT) taxonomy and the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used to assess study quality.
RESULTS: Of 345 records screened, 48 eligible studies were included. Most were online experiments testing message framing, with a smaller number conducted in applied settings such as health professional-delivered education. Significant positive effects were reported in most studies; 30 out of 40 studies with psychological outcomes (e.g. knowledge), 28 out of 40 studies with behavioural outcomes (e.g. intention to mask). Only one study measured a health outcome, with no significant effect. Effective features commonly included video and animation formats and messages from health experts and credible sources. The most frequent BCTs were 'information about health consequences' (33 studies) and 'credible source' (19 studies). Risk of bias was low in 42 studies.
CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight a diverse range of strategies that improved outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic. Better use of behavioural science taxonomies and core outcome sets could help researchers advance the field further during future emergencies.
PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: This review provides insights for a range of stakeholders involved in science translation during emergencies (i.e. scientists and researchers, healthcare providers, health communicators and government officials) and highlights areas requiring further investigation.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023446093.