Health information for hard-to-reach target groups: A qualitative needs assessment

INTRODUCTION

Reaching socially disadvantaged families and older people with health information can be challenging. A needs assessment was conducted to learn more about their health-related needs and preferences and derive recommendations for health information.

METHODS

Focus groups were conducted with socially disadvantaged families, older people and suitable disseminators, like counsellors from various types of counselling centres or welfare facilities (81 participants), and analysed using content analysis.

RESULTS

Socially disadvantaged and hard-to-reach people want to understand health problems, become active in dealing with them themselves, and be involved in medical decision-making. Health information should consider the challenging everyday lives, the limited time available and the short attention span of socially disadvantaged families. There is a preference for short texts and videos. Older people may favour more comprehensive print products for complex topics. Matching photos and illustrations are vital to attract attention. Health information is preferably received via personal contact. Furthermore, online services and social media channels are popular.

DISCUSSION

Some recommendations can be helpful for all target groups of health information, like more illustrations. Others are more specific to the groups investigated and require conceptual groundwork and greater resources, for example, a specific service for disseminators.

CONCLUSION

Hard-to-reach target groups want to understand their health issues, and be proactive and involved in decision-making. Personal contact is of utmost importance. Disseminators play a crucial role and need information they can customize for their clients.

Pictures in health information and their pitfalls: Focus group study and systematic review

BACKGROUND

Health information often includes different categories of pictures. This study comprises: A) exploration of the perception of photos presented in a brochure on the prevention of osteoporosis and B) a systematic review on the effects of pictures in health information.

METHODS

A) We conducted four focus groups. Participants with heterogeneous cultural and educational background were included. The interviews were subjected to qualitative content analysis. B) We searched PubMed, CENTRAL, PSYNDEX, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Campbell Collaboration and DIMDI. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on predefined cognitive and affective outcomes were included. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed the quality of evidence. Descriptive data synthesis was conducted.

RESULTS

A) Within the focus groups comprising 37 participants, four generic categories were identified: comprehension, perception, congruence between photos and content, and alternatives. Identification with portrait photos and the connection between photos and text were important to participants. B) In total, 13 RCTs were included. Quality of evidence was moderate. Types of pictures and their intention varied between studies. Cartoons enhanced comprehension, satisfaction and readability. Photos did not improve cognitive or affective outcomes. Effects of anatomical pictures, pictographs, and drawings were ambiguous.

CONCLUSION

The overall effect of using pictures in health information remains unclear. The type of pictures and readers' characteristics may influence both perception and interpretation. Type, amount, and intention of the pictures should be considered carefully.