Title |
It’s not only what you say, it’s also how you say it: communicating Nipah virus prevention messages during an outbreak in Bangladesh
|
---|---|
Published in |
BMC Public Health, August 2016
|
DOI | 10.1186/s12889-016-3416-z |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Shahana Parveen, M. Saiful Islam, Momtaz Begum, Mahbub-Ul Alam, Hossain M. S. Sazzad, Rebeca Sultana, Mahmudur Rahman, Emily S. Gurley, M. Jahangir Hossain, Stephen P. Luby |
Abstract |
During a fatal Nipah virus (NiV) outbreak in Bangladesh, residents rejected biomedical explanations of NiV transmission and treatment and lost trust in the public healthcare system. Field anthropologists developed and communicated a prevention strategy to bridge the gap between the biomedical and local explanation of the outbreak. We explored residents' beliefs and perceptions about the illness and care-seeking practices and explained prevention messages following an interactive strategy with the aid of photos showed the types of contact that can lead to NiV transmission from bats to humans by drinking raw date palm sap and from person-to-person. The residents initially believed that the outbreak was caused by supernatural forces and continued drinking raw date palm sap despite messages from local health authorities to stop. Participants in community meetings stated that the initial messages did not explain that bats were the source of this virus. After our intervention, participants responded that they now understood how NiV could be transmitted and would abstain from raw sap consumption and maintain safer behaviours while caring for patients. During outbreaks, one-way behaviour change communication without meaningful causal explanations is unlikely to be effective. Based on the cultural context, interactive communication strategies in lay language with supporting evidence can make biomedical prevention messages credible in affected communities, even among those who initially invoke supernatural causal explanations. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 4 | 50% |
Bangladesh | 1 | 13% |
India | 1 | 13% |
Unknown | 2 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 5 | 63% |
Scientists | 1 | 13% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 13% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 100 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 19 | 19% |
Researcher | 15 | 15% |
Student > Bachelor | 11 | 11% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 9% |
Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 5% |
Other | 9 | 9% |
Unknown | 32 | 32% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 22% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 10% |
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 5 | 5% |
Immunology and Microbiology | 4 | 4% |
Social Sciences | 4 | 4% |
Other | 20 | 20% |
Unknown | 35 | 35% |