Search

ObjectiveSugar-sweetened beverage (i.e., sugary drink) consumption is associated with chronic health issues that disproportionately affect Black women. Culturally-informed (CI) health campaigns may be more effective among Black women than campaigns designed for general audiences. This study assesses the effects of a CI campaign on consumption intentions, comparing these effects to general audience and control campaigns.MethodsWe conducted an online between-persons randomized experiment with a national convenience sample of 502 Black women in February 2023. Participants were randomly assigned to view a CI, general audience, or control campaign. Outcomes were intentions to decrease sugary drink consumption (primary outcome; range 1-7), knowledge of (range 0-4) and perceived susceptibility to health harms (range 1-5) and sharing intentions (range 0-3).ResultsThe CI campaign had significantly higher perceived cultural relevance (M = 4.61) than the general audience (M = 3.64) or control (M = 3.66; p's0.05). There was no main effect of campaign condition on knowledge or perceived susceptibility (p's>0.05), though findings were moderated by body size. Based on body size, women reported less perceived susceptibility or knowledge when exposed to the CI campaign, compared to either the control or general audience campaign. Sharing intentions did not differ by campaign condition.ConclusionsFuture research should continue to examine the role of refining message content over a longer duration to understand whether the anticipated impact of CI messages can be achieved in the context of sugary drink consumption among Black women.

BackgroundCancer treatment misinformation, or false claims about alternative cures, often spreads faster and farther than true information on social media. Cancer treatment misinformation can harm the psychosocial and physical health of individuals with cancer and their cancer care networks by causing distress and encouraging people to abandon support, potentially leading to deviations from evidence-based care. There is a pressing need to understand how cancer treatment misinformation is shared and uncover ways to reduce misinformation. ObjectiveWe aimed to better understand exposure and reactions to cancer treatment misinformation, including the willingness of study participants to prosocially intervene and their intentions to share Instagram posts with cancer treatment misinformation. MethodsWe conducted a survey on cancer treatment misinformation among US adults in December 2021. Participants reported their exposure and reactions to cancer treatment misinformation generally (saw or heard, source, type of advice, and curiosity) and specifically on social media (platform, believability). Participants were then randomly assigned to view 1 of 3 cancer treatment misinformation posts or an information post and asked to report their willingness to prosocially intervene and their intentions to share. ResultsAmong US adult participants (N=603; mean age 46, SD 18.83 years), including those with cancer and cancer caregivers, almost 1 in 4 (142/603, 23.5%) received advice about alternative ways to treat or cure cancer. Advice was primarily shared through family (39.4%) and friends (37.3%) for digestive (30.3%) and natural (14.1%) alternative cancer treatments, which generated curiosity among most recipients (106/142, 74.6%). More than half of participants (337/603, 55.9%) saw any cancer treatment misinformation on social media, with significantly higher exposure for those with cancer (53/109, 70.6%) than for those without cancer (89/494, 52.6%; P

State and local health departments have been tasked with promoting the use of face coverings to decrease the spread of COVID-19 in their respective communities. However, little is known about motivations and barriers to wearing face coverings in the context of COVID-19 prevention, particularly among communities of color who are at an increased risk of serious illness from the disease. The purpose of this study was to identify common motivations and barriers to face covering use, as well as explore perceptions of messages encouraging the use of face coverings among a racially and ethnically diverse sample. A survey was distributed electronically to North Carolina (NC) residents through NC Department of Health and Human Services listservs in July 2020. Participants self-categorized as Latino/a (33.5%), Black (39.1%), or white or another race (27.5%). The most commonly endorsed motivations for wearing face coverings were to avoid spreading COVID-19 (77%), as well as to protect people who are vulnerable (76%) and one's community (72%). Being uncomfortable (40%) was the most commonly endorsed barrier. Messages that included a clear request (ex. please wear a face covering) and a direct benefit (ex. keep community safe) were more commonly endorsed than those that did not. Commonly endorsed motivations, behaviors, and messages differed by race and ethnicity. Increased attention to message content, message structure, and access to information and resources may aid local officials in increasing consistent use of face coverings.

E-cigarette use among youth remains a significant public health concern. In 2018, The Real Cost campaign began disseminating messages about the harms of vaping, primarily using digital media. We sought to determine the prevalence of aided recall of The Real Cost e-cigarette prevention ads and identify potential differences by participant characteristics. Participants were a nationally representative sample of adolescents living in United States (US) households recruited by the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) at the University of Chicago’s AmeriSpeak panel in September and October of 2020. A total of 623 adolescents completed the survey. Analyses were weighted to represent the distribution of youth in the US, and effect sizes for individual characteristics were estimated using an adjusted marginalized two-part model. Seventy-one percent of adolescents recalled at least one of the five The Real Cost e-cigarette prevention ads, with individual ad recall ranging from a low of 38.8% (for Magic) to a high of 50.1% (for Narrative). Adjusted estimates of aided recall identified significantly higher recall among Black adolescents and those that used social media at medium or high frequencies (p