Javascript must be enabled to continue!
Health scares: Professional priorities
View through CrossRef
Currently, many health scholars are concerned about health scares. But what do they mean by the term ‘health scare’ — are health scares an identifiable phenomenon and how do we currently understand their causation and consequences? By collecting and analysing published articles about events considered to be health scares, this article maps the current views of scholars on their characteristics and causes. Results show that health scares are generally understood as events characterized by fears of catastrophic consequences but little actual mortality. However, the social and economic impacts of these events have often been severe. This survey shows that health scares can be usefully sorted into six categories, each with identifiable internal dynamics, suggesting different communications strategies to achieve resolution in each category. Using the social amplification of risk framework, the conditions under which risk signals were amplified were traced in general terms among major stakeholders. Simple causes for health scare events could not be identified, though some triggers did emerge. Importantly, public ignorance of real risk, media scaremongering and political inaction could be dismissed as primary explanations, though they were sometimes factors in scare events. Implications for risk communication and for future research on risk and public health are discussed.
Title: Health scares: Professional priorities
Description:
Currently, many health scholars are concerned about health scares.
But what do they mean by the term ‘health scare’ — are health scares an identifiable phenomenon and how do we currently understand their causation and consequences? By collecting and analysing published articles about events considered to be health scares, this article maps the current views of scholars on their characteristics and causes.
Results show that health scares are generally understood as events characterized by fears of catastrophic consequences but little actual mortality.
However, the social and economic impacts of these events have often been severe.
This survey shows that health scares can be usefully sorted into six categories, each with identifiable internal dynamics, suggesting different communications strategies to achieve resolution in each category.
Using the social amplification of risk framework, the conditions under which risk signals were amplified were traced in general terms among major stakeholders.
Simple causes for health scare events could not be identified, though some triggers did emerge.
Importantly, public ignorance of real risk, media scaremongering and political inaction could be dismissed as primary explanations, though they were sometimes factors in scare events.
Implications for risk communication and for future research on risk and public health are discussed.
Related Results
Research Priorities for Carotid Conditions: results of the UK Vascular James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Process
Research Priorities for Carotid Conditions: results of the UK Vascular James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Process
Introduction: Recent estimates of the prevalence of carotid plaque disease and carotid stenosis in people aged 39–79 years are 21.2% and 1.5% of the global population, respectively...
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The UP Manila Health Policy Development Hub recognizes the invaluable contribution of the participants in theseries of roundtable discussions listed below:
RTD: Beyond Hospit...
Ehealth Communication
Ehealth Communication
Ehealth, also known as E-health, is a relatively new area of health communication inquiry that examines the development, implementation, and application of a broad range of evolvin...
Professional Development
Professional Development
The span of professional development research literature reveals, arguably, three trends. Literature of the earliest phase, largely during the 1970s and 1980s—the era of the “searc...
How professional development can be supported for health and care research methodologists: results of the PROfesSionnal develoPmEnt for Research methodologists (PROSPER) e-Delphi and consensus study
How professional development can be supported for health and care research methodologists: results of the PROfesSionnal develoPmEnt for Research methodologists (PROSPER) e-Delphi and consensus study
ObjectiveResearch methodologists play a pivotal role in health and care research, yet they face many challenges relating to their professional development. The PROfesSional develoP...
Economics in health care
Economics in health care
IntroductionThe development of medicine in the last three decades has brought not only new diagnostic and therapeutic possibilities, but also new thinking about health in its inter...
UK Public Health Systems
UK Public Health Systems
Within the UK there are four public health systems covering each of four countries making up the UK: England is the largest country, followed by Scotland, Wales, and Northern Irela...
A comprehensive approach to the quality military human resources policy – the professional-psychophysiological selection in the Armed Forces of Ukraine
A comprehensive approach to the quality military human resources policy – the professional-psychophysiological selection in the Armed Forces of Ukraine
According to the analysis of recent domestic and foreign publications on the professional suitability of military personnel, the current state of the human resources policy impleme...

