TY  - JOUR
AU  - Ceretti, Elisabetta
AU  - Covolo, Loredana
AU  - Cappellini, Francesca
AU  - Nanni, Alberto
AU  - Sorosina, Sara
AU  - Beatini, Andrea
AU  - Taranto, Mirella
AU  - Gasparini, Arianna
AU  - De Castro, Paola
AU  - Brusaferro, Silvio
AU  - Gelatti, Umberto
PY  - 2022
DA  - 2022/9/13
TI  - Evaluating the Effectiveness of Internet-Based Communication for Public Health: Systematic Review
JO  - J Med Internet Res
SP  - e38541
VL  - 24
IS  - 9
KW  - internet-based communication
KW  - websites
KW  - social media
KW  - public health
KW  - efficacy
KW  - systematic review
KW  - communication
KW  - internet-based
KW  - health information
KW  - exchange
KW  - health care
KW  - web-based
KW  - campaigns
AB  - Background: Communicating strategically is a key issue for health organizations. Over the past decade, health care communication via social media and websites has generated a great deal of studies examining different realities of communication strategies. However, when it comes to systematic reviews, there is fragmentary evidence on this type of communication. Objective: The aim of this systematic review was to summarize the evidence on web institutional health communication for public health authorities to evaluate possible aim-specific key points based on these existing studies. Methods: Guided by the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement, we conducted a comprehensive review across 2 electronic databases (PubMed and Web of Science) from January 1, 2011, to October 7, 2021, searching for studies investigating institutional health communication. In total, 2 independent researchers (AN and SS) reviewed the articles for inclusion, and the assessment of methodological quality was based on the Kmet appraisal checklist. Results: A total of 78 articles were selected. Most studies (35/78, 45%) targeted health promotion and disease prevention, followed by crisis communication (24/78, 31%), general health (13/78, 17%), and misinformation correction and health promotion (6/78, 8%). Engagement and message framing were the most analyzed aspects. Few studies (14/78, 18%) focused on campaign effectiveness. Only 23% (18/78) of the studies had an experimental design. The Kmet evaluation was used to distinguish studies presenting a solid structure from lacking studies. In particular, considering the 0.75-point threshold, 36% (28/78) of the studies were excluded. Studies above this threshold were used to identify a series of aim-specific and medium-specific suggestions as the communication strategies used differed greatly. Conclusions: Overall, the findings suggest that no single strategy works best in the case of web-based health care communication. The extreme variability of outcomes and the lack of a unitary measure for assessing the end points of a specific campaign or study lead us to reconsider the tools we use to evaluate the efficacy of web-based health communication. 
SN  - 1438-8871
UR  - https://www.jmir.org/2022/9/e38541
UR  - https://doi.org/10.2196/38541
UR  - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36098994
DO  - 10.2196/38541
ID  - info:doi/10.2196/38541
ER  -