![[ Visit Client Website ]](images/banner.gif)
Background:
Communicating in a radiation emergency is uniquely challenging. Unlike other threats, radiation is invisible, silent, odorless, and can only be detected with specialized equipment. It is unfamiliar and feared by the general public, as well as many of those in response roles. Providing effective communication in radiation emergencies can help alleviate fears and decrease illness, injury, and death. In this effort, the Radiation Studies Branch redesigned the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Radiation Emergencies website to focus on protective messages that are accessible, actionable, and engaging.Program background:
CDC’s Radiation Studies Branch conducted extensive research on information needs for the public, professionals, and special populations in a radiation emergency. This research included radiation emergency message testing, media message testing, and health effects message testing with the general public. Incorporating the findings from this research into practice and lessons learned from past radiation emergencies, CDC recently launched a redesigned Radiation Emergencies website (http://emergency.cdc.gov/radiation) to communicate with public and professional audiences before, during, and after a radiation emergency. This presentation will identify challenges in communicating during a radiation emergency, provide an overview of key findings from audience research and usability testing, and highlight tools and resources from the redesigned Radiation Emergencies website to help public health professionals better communicate in radiation emergencies.Evaluation Methods and Results:
Prior to website development, audience research found that users wanted short, concise and simple messages in the active voice with specific instructions on what to do to protect themselves. [i][ii][iii]Web metrics collected from 2011 and 2012 reinforced this, noting that users were primarily searching for information on countermeasures and treatment modalities for radioactive contamination – users wanted to know “what do I do?” in the event of a radiation emergency. Two rounds of usability testing with members of the public and professionals occurred in 2012, involving remote and in-lab interviews. Users suggested ways to improve the site including the importance of more streamlined content and the use of media (e.g. photos, illustrations) in tandem with content to make it more understandable.
Conclusions:
Implications for research and/or practice:
The Radiation Emergencies website redesign exhibits the importance of using plain language, concise messages, and engaging content to illustrate an important and often misunderstood topic.[i] Formative Research IND Message Testing with the General Public. CDC, Radiation Studies Branch. March 2011. http://emergency.cdc.gov/radiation/pdf/IND%20Message%20Testing%20Final%20Report.pdf
[ii] Detonation of an Improvised Nuclear Device. CDC, Radiation Studies Branch. March 2011. http://emergency.cdc.gov/radiation/pdf/Media%20Message%20Testing%20Video%20Script%20Final%20Report.pdf
[iii] Health Effects Message Testing: Detonation of Improvised Nuclear Device. CDC, Radiation Studies Branch. January 2012. http://emergency.cdc.gov/radiation/pdf/Health%20Message%20Testing-Detonation%20of%20an%20Improvised%20Nuclear%20Device.pdf