Over the last few years, the COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the huge gap between health communication and the health literacy needs of different communities (White et al., 2021). We have seen inequities widen, and failures in communication that have left some people better equipped to take prevention measures than others (Kalocsányiová et al., Citation2022). On the other hand, we have also seen the strength and resilience of communities and evolving partnerships, leading to new communication strategies (World Health Organization, Citation2023).
The challenge of a recent pandemic provides an opportunity to reflect on what we know and don’t know in the fields of health literacy and health communication. Applying a “universal precautions” approach (Agency for Healthcare Research & Quality, 2020) to health literacy and communication seems simple, for example, but it is rarely done in practice (Mac et al., Citation2021; Mishra & Dexter, Citation2020; Trivedi et al., Citation2023). Within consultations, we know the communication between health professionals, patients and their families is essential to support safety and quality in healthcare (King & Hoppe, Citation2013). But evidence-based communication tools like patient decision aids are not often implemented systematically (Joseph-Williams et al., 2021; Stacey et al., Citation2019) or adapted to health literacy needs (Muscat et al., Citation2021). In mass media communication, the right spokesperson on the right platform can make all the difference for reaching audiences that do not engage in mainstream news (Chen & Wang, Citation2021). Yet research on how to use emerging social media trends to support health messages and combat misinformation is still evolving (Borges do Nascimento et al., Citation2022). Even the content of health messages still has evidence gaps – we don’t know how best to convey different types of uncertainty or how to adapt this for communities with different understandings of concepts like chance and risk (Bonner et al., Citation2021).
Health Literacy and Communication Open seeks to bring the fields of health literacy and health communication together to build theory and evidence for better communication that enables communities to access, understand, appraise and act on health information. An online-only open-access, peer-reviewed journal, Health Literacy and Communication Open will publish original research articles on all areas of health literacy and health communication. This includes but is not limited to public health and health promotion, patient-provider-family interactions, health care interventions, and health communication technology. Our aim is to be a forum in which the international community can come together to not only describe the extent and nature of health literacy and health communication issues through descriptive research and comprehensive reviews, but also one where we can build a stronger evidence-base for effective interventions and their implementation. We will seek to unpack what works (and what does not work!), for whom, in what circumstances, and why, and particularly encourage authors to consider the varying effects interventions can have on people with different levels of health literacy and how we can sustain implementation of those which are effective. To this end, we particularly welcome manuscripts that report on the co-design and development of interventions, protocols, feasibility and pilot studies, as well as rigorous evaluations. The journal also offers a space to build, critique and apply health literacy and communication theories.
Please join us in tackling contemporary issues in health literacy and health communication by engaging as a regular reader, an author, and a peer reviewer; or through sharing your feedback and ideas on how to improve the journal. It is through our own focus on high-quality communication that we hope to advance the field.
Sydney Health Literacy Lab, Sydney School of Public Health, Faulty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
[email protected]
References
- Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (2020). AHRQ health literacy universal precautions toolkit. Retrieved May 17, 2020, from https://www.ahrq.gov/health-literacy/improve/precautions/index.html
- Bonner, C., Trevena, L. J., Gaissmaier, W., Han, P. K. J., Okan, Y., Ozanne, E., Peters, E., Timmermans, D., & Zikmund-Fisher, B. J. (2021). Current best practice for presenting probabilities in patient decision aids: Fundamental principles. Medical Decision Making : An International Journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making, 41(7), 1–2.
- Borges do Nascimento, I. J., Pizarro, A. B., Almeida, J. M., Azzopardi-Muscat, N., Gonçalves, M. A., Björklund, M., & Novillo-Ortiz, D. (2022). Infodemics and health misinformation: a systematic review of reviews. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 100(9), 544–561.
- Chen, J., & Wang, Y. (2021). Social media use for health purposes: Systematic review. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 23(5), e17917-e17917.
- Joseph-Williams, N., Abhyankar, P., Boland, L., Bravo, P., Brenner, A. T., Brodney, S., Coulter, A., Giguere, A., Hoffman, A., Korner, M., Langford, A., Legare, F., Matlock, D., Moumjid, N., Munro, S., Steffensen, K. D., Stirling, C., & van der Weijden, T. (2021). What works in implementing patient decision aids in routine clinical settings? A rapid realist review and update from the international patient decision aid standards collaboration. Medical Decision Making : An International Journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making, 41(7), 907–937.
- Kalocsányiová, E., Essex, R., & Fortune, V. (2022). Inequalities in Covid-19 messaging: A systematic scoping review. Health Communication. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2022.2088022
- King, A., & Hoppe, R. B. (2013). “Best practice" for patient-centered communication: a narrative review. Journal of Graduate Medical Education, 5(3), 385–393.
- Mac, O. A., Muscat, D. M., Ayre, J., Patel, P., & McCaffery, K. J. (2021). The readability of official public health information on COVID-19. The Medical Journal of Australia, 215(8), 373–375.
- Mishra, V., & Dexter, J. P. (2020). Comparison of readability of official public health information about COVID-19 on websites of international agencies and the governments of 15 countries. JAMA Network Open, 3(8), e2018033.
- Muscat, D. M., Smith, J., Mac, O., Cadet, T., Giguere, A., Housten, A. J., Langford, A. T., Smith, S. K., Durand, M. A., & McCaffery, K. (2021). Addressing health literacy in patient decision aids: An update from the international patient decision aid standards. Medical Decision Making : An International Journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making, 41(7), 848–869.
- Stacey, D., Suwalska, V., Boland, L., Lewis, K. B., Presseau, J., & Thomson, R. (2019). Are patient decision aids used in clinical practice after rigorous evaluation? A survey of trial authors. Medical Decision Making : An International Journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making, 39(7), 805–815.
- Trivedi, S. P., Corderman, S., Berlinberg, E., Schoenthaler, A., & Horwitz, L. I. (2023). Assessment of patient education delivered at time of hospital discharge. JAMA Internal Medicine, 183(5), 417–423.
- White, S. J., Barello, S., Cao di San Marco, E., Colombo, C., Eeckman, E., Gilligan, C., Graffigna, G., Jirasevijinda, T., Mosconi, P., Mullan, J., Rehman, S. U., Rubinelli, S., Vegni, E., & Krystallidou, D. (2021). Critical observations on and suggested ways forward for healthcare communication during COVID-19: pEACH position paper. Patient Education and Counseling, 104(2), 217–222.
- World Health Organization. (2023). WHO compilation of innovative concepts to communicate science during the COVID-19 pandemic. Retrieved May 17, 2023, from https://www.who.int/teams/epi-win/scicom-compilation