Category: We Heart Health Literacy

People like pictures. So health communicators often rely on stock photos to grab a reader’s attention. Finding one is a cinch. Just enter a health topic in a stock photo agency’s search, and you’ll get pages and pages of results.
But there’s a problem: A lot of those results are just not that helpful.

Some are freaky.

(A few keywords you may have searched to get this result: Doctor, injection, nurse, patient, mummy.)

Some are inexplicable.

(A few keywords you may have searched to get this result: Kitchen, peanut butter, pollution, toxic, post nuclear winter.)

Some feature fruit bowls fashioned from human heads.

(A few keywords you may have searched to get this result: Banana, fruit, healthy, nutrition, fashion.)

Some illustrate hazards faced by women eating salad in zero gravity.

(A few keywords you may have searched to get this result: Food, organic, salad, vegetarian, cheerful.)

But more common — and actually worse — are pictures that mean absolutely nothing. You’ve seen ones like this a million times:

Oh, hooray! She’s so, so happy! But why? She’s gone gluten-free? She refinanced at a low rate? She makes $6,000 a month from home? This picture doesn’t tell a story.

Using photos as mere decoration is a missed opportunity. Instead, use images that help communicate your message. You know, photos of real people doing realistic things that are actually related to your content in an obvious way.

If you’re writing about bike safety, show someone wearing a helmet and riding safely on a bike path. If you’re writing about quitting smoking, show someone circling a quit date on a calendar. Choose images that really show what you’re writing about.

Otherwise, what’s the point? We doubt the thumbs-up lady knows.

The bottom line: Too many sites rely on staged, generic stock photos. Be choosy — only use images that directly support your message.

Everyone has a vague sense of what the phrase “lifestyle changes” means. You know: eating better, exercising, and… uh… other healthy stuff.

But when you’re trying to communicate health recommendations, giving readers a vague sense of your message isn’t good enough. People need actionable information to help them improve their lives, not fuzzy advice to “do healthy things.”

Here’s a telltale sign that a term isn’t clear enough to be useful: it could mean the opposite of what you’re trying to convey. After all, wouldn’t “sit on the couch more” and “drink trans fat smoothies” count as lifestyle changes?

Something else to consider: “lifestyle changes” isn’t something people actually say. No human has ever written, “Make lifestyle changes” on a New Year’s resolution list. What they actually write is something specific. Eat less sugar. Start yoga classes. Quit smoking.

That’s why, dear readers, instead of talking about “lifestyle changes,” it’s important to be specific. According to the research, which particular behavior changes will help? Who will they help? How much? If you say exactly what you mean, you’ll do your audience a big favor.

The bottom line: People tune out vague phrases like “make lifestyle changes.” Change your tune and get specific instead.

Tweet about it: Why “lifestyle changes” can be the wrong choice — at least in health writing: https://bit.ly/2VsYb0w via @CommunicateHlth #HealthLit

As health literacy becomes a national priority, more organizations are bringing health literacy advocates together under one roof. Health literacy events and conferences are great opportunities to meet in person, swap resources, and share strategies.

Here are just a few of our favorite health literacy events coming up this year:

Institute for Healthcare Advancement Health Literacy Conference
May 7–9 • Irvine, CA

Tufts University Health Literacy Leadership Institute
June 9–13 • Boston, MA

National Conference on Health Communication, Marketing, and Media
August 19–21 • Atlanta, GA

Health Literacy Research Conference
November 3–4 • Bethesda, MD

Many states offer more localized events, like the Florida Literacy Conference or Texas Health Literacy Conference. To find events in your area, check your local Society for Public Health Education (SOPHE) chapter.

The bottom line: There are lots of great events in 2014 if you’re looking to connect with other health literacy advocates!

For most health educators, the value and importance of vaccines goes without saying. But, educating people — whether in person or via a website or fact sheet — about the benefits of vaccines can be challenging. Here are some ideas.

Talk about herd immunity, but without the “herd.”
True, there were cows involved when the smallpox vaccine was developed. But we’re pretty sure that most people don’t like thinking of themselves as part of a herd. Instead, try making a connection to people they care about.

When people say:
“I won’t get too sick from the flu, so I don’t need to get the shot.”

You can reply:
“When you’re up to date on your shots, you’re not the only one who’s protected. You also help to protect everyone around you — like your children, your parents, and people in your community who get sick a lot.”

Ax the stats.
Public health folks love to cite statistics. And there’s nothing wrong with telling a professional audience that 604 (87%) of the measles cases reported from 2001 to 2010 were import-associated.

But when you’re communicating with most people, it’s better to say something like this: “Getting all your shots is important because diseases can travel quickly around the world. For example, most Americans who get measles catch it while traveling overseas.”

Meet people where they are.
Recognize that your readers may have fears or misconceptions about vaccinations. If they do, it just means your work isn’t over yet.

Your impressive statistics won’t convince people to get a shot if they believe it’s unsafe, so take the time to dispel myths along with presenting facts.

The bottom line: Take the time to explain the benefits of vaccines — and think about your audience’s needs while you do it.

We ❤ giving you simple, clear answers to your health communication challenges. But when it comes to describing people as Latino or Hispanic? The short answer: both terms work, and neither is best.

First, let’s clarify what each term means. (Special thanks to @terryblas and his comic You Say Latino for breaking this down for us.)

• Hispanic refers to language. It describes people from primarily Spanish-speaking places, such as Puerto Rico, Mexico, and Venezuela.
• Latino refers to geography. It describes people from Latin America, which includes Mexico, Central America, South America, and some of the Caribbean Islands.

Now, as with any question of naming and identity, we believe the “right” answer comes down to how individuals want to identify themselves. It’s a personal preference, not a general rule. Polling in recent years shows a pretty even split between people preferring (for themselves) Hispanic or Latino.

So about that simple answer…

We recommend avoiding both terms whenever possible and getting specific instead. Many people are likely to identify as Mexican American or Salvadoran or Peruvian (or maybe just American) before they identify as either Latino or Hispanic.

If you’re writing about an individual or smaller group, ask them which term they prefer. But if you can’t be that specific, rest easy — Hispanic and Latino are both okay terms to use.

And finally, if you choose Latino over Hispanic, use Latino if you’re referring to only men or to men and women. Use Latina if you’re referring exclusively to women. Or you might want to look into whether your audience prefers the newer term Latinx.

The bottom line: If you can, get specific — like Mexican or Costa Rican. If you can’t, Hispanic or Latino both work.

Tweet about it: What’s the difference between Hispanic and Latino? @CommunicateHlth shares tips for deciding which term to use! https://bit.ly/2P0jAP7 #HealthLit

Telling people they have the power to lower their risk for a certain disease is a great motivational tool. So, when you’re writing health content that encourages readers to make healthy changes, the concept of disease risk is useful.

Unfortunately, “risk” is often paired with “factor” to form a term that’s the opposite of helpful. For readers with limited health literacy skills, the concept of risk is already a tricky one — so why complicate matters further by talking about abstract “risk factors” when you can directly explain the risk? We suggest you don’t.

• Instead of: Smoking is a risk factor for lung cancer.
• Try: If you smoke, you have a higher risk of getting lung cancer.
• Instead of: Physical inactivity is a risk factor for heart disease.
• Try: Getting active can help you lower your risk for heart disease.

Bonus: Ditching the “factor” also makes it easier to address your readers directly by writing in second person, which is another great strategy for writing actionable content.

The bottom line: “Factor” increases the risk for confusion — so when you talk about risk, factor it out.

Tweet about it: Writing #HealthLit content about risk? Ditch the “factor,” says @CommunicateHlth: https://bit.ly/2RmHUrQ

This post tackles a common word in health writing: vaccines. Everybody needs them, so we often write about them — but what’s the simplest, clearest way to do it?

Usually, our advice to fellow plain language writers is to define a medical or technical term in plain language the first time you use it. In this case, you might say: “Get the flu vaccine (shot) every year.”

But is “vaccine” really an essential health term for general audiences? We don’t think so. Most of time, we’d just say: “Get the flu shot every year.”

Yes, we know that the flu vaccine also comes in a nasal spray. But let’s not get lost in the details. Cover the basics of what the flu shot is and how it works — then you can go into the nuances of nasal spray versus shot, if you need to.

For most consumers, shot is a familiar word. Getting shots is a common experience. If you connect your writing to things people are used to, you’re more likely to get your point across.

The bottom line: Say “vaccine (shot)” if you absolutely have to. But we prefer “shot” for most audiences.

When budgets get tight, user testing often ends up on the chopping block. But there’s a way to do it on the cheap when more formal testing isn’t an option. Take it to the people — do a pilot test!

Pilot testing allows you to develop or improve your health materials together with your priority audience. Let’s face it: All materials have problems (some more than others). These problems may not be obvious to you, but your users will always spot them. Use this to your advantage.

You can do pilot testing with just about anyone. Ideally, you have 3 to 8 people from your priority audience test your materials. If that’s not possible, settle for the “1 is better than none” approach. The feedback of a single coworker not involved with your project is better than nothing. Parents and grandparents are often good to test with, too — plus it counts as a phone call!

Although your results may not be generalizable in the academic sense, even a test or 2 will catch usability issues that you likely wouldn’t have caught on your own.

We like to pilot test anywhere people wait: clinic waiting rooms, community centers, libraries, adult education centers, campus student centers. And recruiting is pretty easy as long as you’re prepared to hear about 10 “no thanks, I’m in a rush” responses for every 1 person who stops to talk with you.

The questions you ask will depend on what you’re testing, but here’s our greatest hits collection:

• What catches your eye?
• Who do you think this material is designed for?
• Tell me in your own words what this is trying to say.
• What is it telling you to do?
• What do you think of the pictures? Do these people look like anyone you know?
• Do you think you could do what this material is suggesting?
• Do you think people will take any of these steps after reading the material?

And, we’d like to give a friendly reminder to always get the needed organizational approval for testing (e.g., Institutional Review Board (IRB) clearance). Small pilot tests are often exempt, but it’s best to check before you start.

The bottom line: Pilot testing can be an easy and inexpensive way to get feedback from your audience. Try it with your next project.

In 2014, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) made a front page-worthy decision that’s still worth noting today. In response to efforts by HIV activists, CDC decided to officially update its term for sex without a condom from “unprotected sex” to “condomless sex.” (We love this so much that we almost want to use all caps to tell you how much. But we won’t.)

Why did this decision thrill us here at We ❤ Health Literacy Headquarters? Because, dear readers, when people say “unprotected sex” in health information, what they’re actually talking about is sex without a condom.

“Unprotected” is a vague — and potentially misleading — term where sex is concerned. Consider these scenarios:

• A woman who’s on the pill has sex with a man, and they don’t use a condom. She may be protected from pregnancy, but she could still get an STD. Did she have protected sex or unprotected sex?
• A man has sex with his monogamous partner who’s HIV-positive. They don’t use a condom, but his partner has an undetectable level of HIV in his blood — and they’re both taking preventive medicines. Would it really be accurate to say that’s unprotected sex?

Interesting questions, right? And maybe even a little loaded since the word “unprotected” can convey a bit of judgment or blame — if you’re doing something “unprotected,” the implication is you’re being careless.

So CDC has sent the vague “unprotected sex” packing, replacing it with exactly what they mean: “condomless sex.” Although we prefer the phrase “sex without a condom,” this change is a huge improvement — and will hopefully be adopted by every sex ed teacher in the land.

This is a prime example of health literacy in action — and why it matters.

The bottom line: “Condomless sex” is more specific than “unprotected sex,” and it takes away the blame.

Tweet about it: This week from @CommunicateHlth: When you’re talking about sex without a condom, follow @CDCgov’s lead and ditch the word “unprotected”! Details: https://bit.ly/2G3wzLQ

It’s a fact: more and more people are seeking health information online. This means that websites need to be — and look — easy to use. And nowhere on your site is this more important than the homepage.

You can’t judge a book by its cover, but you can judge a website by its homepage.

The homepage is often your audience’s introduction to both your brand and your content. So it needs to make a good first impression, and fast. Research shows that users decide within just 10 seconds of landing on a webpage whether to stay there or go elsewhere.

How can you make your homepage compelling and user friendly? Here are some tips:

• Keep it clean. Brief text and a simple color palette help you create a clutter-free page. In other words, white space is your friend.
• Make your purpose clear. Use text and graphics to clearly state the purpose of your website right there on the homepage.
• Provide a simple navigation. This will enable users to quickly scan and understand the different sections of your website.
• Implement responsive design. Chances are users will access your website from all kinds of devices. Make sure people can easily view it on a computer, phone, tablet, plane, train, or automobile.

But don’t just take our word for it. Test your homepage with your audience and see what they think.

The bottom line: When designing your website’s homepage, keep it simple. This will set the tone for your brand and content.

Tweet about it: Less is more! Find out why @CommunicateHlth recommends keeping #HealthLit homepages clean and simple: https://bit.ly/2MQ3MgV