Category: We Heart Health Literacy

Well, it’s an exciting day here at We ❤️ Health Literacy HQ because we’re rolling out our new Framework for Equity-Centered Health Communication! This is something we’ve been thinking about and working on for a long time — and we’re proud to share it with you here today, our dear readers. Check out the framework now.

Right off the bat, we want to emphasize that we’re really interested in your feedback on this resource. We certainly don’t expect to get everything right, and we want to hear from you — folks putting the framework to, well, work — about how we can improve it. Tell us your thoughts by writing to learn@communicatehealth.com! 

As to the “why” behind this framework, we’ll let CH President Stacy Robison’s foreword speak for itself. Below is a slightly abridged version.

---

The COVID-19 pandemic forced us to reckon with some hard truths. In response, pretty much everyone — including leadership at CDC — is calling for more emphasis on health equity, transparency, and clear health communication. At CommunicateHealth, we’re all for it.

But how does this work in practice? Unfortunately, guidance in this department is a bit thin, leaving many public health communicators with more questions than answers. What does centering equity in health communication look like? And how is it different than what we’ve been doing to date? What does clear, accessible public health guidance sound like?

We have some ideas.

At CommunicateHealth, we’ve been following an equity-centered health communication model for more than a decade. We started with the fundamentals of health communication, and over the years we added some adult learning theory, mashed it up with principles borrowed from human-centered design, and elevated one criterion for success above all others: Is the information easy to access, understand, and use?

The result is a health communication framework that prioritizes equitable access to basic health information and services. It’s by no means groundbreaking or even original. But it’s simple enough to follow, and we’ve used it to train hundreds of CommunicateHealth team members over the years.

Public health communication is at a crossroads. And we’re optimistic that, together, we’ll chart the right path forward. We hope, in some small way, this framework will help set us on that path — or at least get us asking the right questions. Fact is, health communication can worsen health inequities, or it can start to close gaps in access and understanding. And small shifts in our methods and mindsets can make all the difference.

The future of public health communication is ours to redesign.

The bottom line: Check out and share our new Framework for Equity-Centered Health Communication — and let us know what you think!

---

Tweet about it: Heads up, #HealthComm colleagues! @CommunicateHlth has just launched a new framework for centering equity in the health communication process. Learn more: https://bit.ly/3l75qwD #HealthLiteracy #HealthEquity

Here at We ❤️ Health Literacy HQ, hearing from you, our dear readers, is one of our favorite things. And when we can, we ❤️ to feature real-life questions from our community — which is what we’ve got for you today.

It’s one we’re hearing from lots of folks in various contexts right now: With the current focus on using inclusive language in health comm… oh, and let’s pause to acknowledge how great it is that we can say there’s a current focus on inclusive language in health comm — hooray! Okay, back to the question: In today’s health communication landscape, how can we make sure our language is inclusive and clear?

There are a couple things to acknowledge right up front. First, language is evolving very quickly. This may be especially true for topics like sexuality, gender, and disability — things that shape who we are and how we experience the world. That means people may come to our materials with wildly different vocabularies and expectations. Some people may feel affirmed and validated when they see newer, more inclusive terms. But people who aren’t familiar with these terms may feel confused or even alienated by them. That’s the reality of our communication landscape at the moment, and it can make things tricky.

And on a related note, the answer to specific terminology questions in this context is almost always going to be… it depends. Of course that’s not actionable advice, but it feels important to “say out loud” nonetheless. There just isn’t generalizable guidance in this space, and that means we need to be really intentional and think through language nuances on a case-by-case basis. It’s our actual job!

That said, there’s plenty we can do. As a starting point, we can acknowledge these differences and approach our work with empathy for both groups of readers. And while there’s no one-size-fits-all approach, here are some ideas for how to balance inclusivity and plain language best practices:

• Pair newer, more inclusive terms with more familiar terms. For example, one reader asked specifically if “chestfeeding” might confuse people used to seeing “breastfeeding.” In that case, you might want to use “chestfeeding (also called breastfeeding).” You can also ditch the parenthesis, as in “women and people with uteruses.” It may not always be the most elegant phrasing, but it can be quite effective.
• Offer specific examples to contextualize newer terms. Never underestimate the power of examples! If you’re writing about mobility aids, consider adding some examples like this: “mobility aids — like wheelchairs, canes, or walkers.” Simple and clear for the win.
• Segment your audience. The more specific your audience, the more you can get to know them (see next tip) and the more informed your starting point will be. For example, if you’re creating a material that’s specifically for trans and nonbinary people, it’s pretty likely they’ll be familiar with newer terms and concepts related to gender.
• Test, talk, and listen. If you’re wondering if we’ll ever get tired of plugging research with your priority audience, the answer is absolutely not! It’s always best to ask your audience about their language preferences (just don’t use “preferences” if you’re asking about pronouns). If you can’t do formal research, get a gut check from an audience member — or someone who might be more familiar with your audience than you. Ask your colleagues, family members, and friends. Talk about the issues that come up. Listen. We bet you’ll learn a lot.
• Check out resources created by and for your audience. For example, if you’re creating materials about gender and sexuality for autistic adults, you might check out resources from the Autistic Women & Nonbinary Network to get a pulse on issues that are important to autistic LGBTQ+ people — and what language-related conversations might be going on at the moment.

The bottom line: It can be tricky to balance clear and inclusive language — but we can do it, and it’s really worth it.

---

Copy/paste to post on social (and tag us!): It can be tricky to balance clear and #InclusiveLanguage. But that’s part of our job as health communicators, says CommunicateHealth: https://bit.ly/3J9xZmg #HealthComm #HealthLiteracy

Have you ever felt alone? In need of company on your quest to offer clear health information to your audiences, fighting jargon and misinformation like Don Quixote fought his windmills? Fear not, dear readers — the Society for Health Communication has your back! As the preeminent professional group devoted to health communication, the Society’s goal is to bring together people across the field — public health folks, academics, health care professionals, and others — to advance health communication.

The Society offers a range of professional development options and opportunities to connect:

• Webinars and trainings presented by industry leaders
• The Annual National Summit for a deep dive on health comm topics (this year’s is coming up on June 12 and 13!)
• A job board for members

Some services, like webinar recordings, are available to anyone through the Society’s website. Others, like the job board, are reserved for members — the good news is that right now, it’s free to join as an individual member! If you’re looking to expand your network, boost your professional skills, and connect with your peers, this is a great resource for you.

Or, if health comm is your organization’s bread and butter, you can join as an organizational member for a yearly fee. We’ve heard their members have impeccable taste and are really fun to hang out with. (Okay, full disclosure… we know a lot of them! In fact, our very own Stacy Robison was elected to the 2023 Society leadership team.)

On a slightly more serious note — if there’s ever a time to come together as health communicators, it’s now. Exciting things are happening in the field (ChatGPT, anyone?), and the need for clear, accessible, and accurate health information is ever-present. The best way to keep providing that information to our audiences is to learn from and support each other.

The bottom line: Check out the Society for Health Communication — because we can do more to champion clear health communication when we do it together.

---

Tweet about it: Looking for a way to expand your network and boost your #HealthComm skills? Joining @healthcommsoc may be just what you’re looking for, says @CommunicateHlth: https://bit.ly/3ZblsEa

Here at We ❤️ Health Literacy HQ, we’re serious about focusing our messaging on the things our audience cares about. And as you may know, dear readers, using audience segmentation is a great way to do just that. When you segment your audience, you narrow it down — often using factors like race and ethnicity, age, gender, income level, or geographic location. But something that even the best-meaning public health professionals often overlook is the complexities that exist within an audience segment. That’s where intersectionality comes in.

The term “intersectionality” was conceived in the late ‘80s by civil rights advocate and scholar Kimberlé Crenshaw to account for the specific, intersectional oppression of Black women due to their gender and their race. Use of the term today varies a bit, but in public health it generally comes up in the context of health equity and refers to recognizing the combined effect of having multiple identities based on social factors (e.g., race and ethnicity, class, religion, gender identity, sexual orientation) — and how that contributes to inequities.

As Crenshaw herself said when asked about the evolution of the term: “Intersectionality is a lens through which you can see where power comes and collides, where it interlocks and intersects. It’s not simply that there’s a race problem here, a gender problem here, and a class or LGBTQ problem there. Many times that framework erases what happens to people who are subject to all of these things.”

That’s exactly why it’s so important to account for overlap in people’s identities. While it’s certainly helpful to learn about and reflect on the collective experiences of a group — and identify ways to best engage and promote behavior change to that group — we have to avoid pushing a singular narrative onto everyone in our audience. In other words, we can’t assume that there’s a singular experience for all people in the group.

Unfortunately, it’s common to default to generalities about our audience — it’s why we often talk about “what works” to reach Black people or trans people or parents or people with disabilities. But in real life, we know that people don’t fit into neat boxes. Identity is messy — and Black trans people or parents with a disability deserve tailored, effective health info just like everyone else.

So how do you learn about the nuanced identity intersections of your audience members? Start by asking them in formative research! Focus groups, in-depth interviews, and online surveys are all great ways to learn about your audience and what matters to them. You can also ask your professional network or social circle if anyone would be willing to give you informal feedback. You may even be able to find advocacy orgs that focus on specific intersecting identities and could help you think through the distinct experiences and identities that exist within your audience.

However you decide to go about it, just remember to take a moment (preferably lots of moments!) to explore the intersections that exist within audience segments. When you do, you’ll improve your health materials — and better serve everyone in your audience.

The bottom line: Acknowledging and exploring your audience’s intersecting identities is key to developing effective health information for everyone — and that helps advance health equity.

---

Tweet about it: This week, @CommunicateHlth is talking about why it’s so important for #HealthComm professionals to keep intersectionality top of mind: https://bit.ly/3DV24mT #HealthLiteracy #HealthEquity

Today, we invite you to ponder one of the great traditions of American vernacular with us. And then, dear readers, we invite you to… (mostly) stop using it in your health comm materials! As you may have guessed from the title, we’re talking about using the term “Americans” to refer to people living in the United States. Alas, turns out that a time-honored tradition among Presidents addressing the country is somewhat less appropriate in health communication.

The “why” here is pretty straightforward: The term “Americans” doesn’t include everyone who lives, works, and engages with the health care system in the United States. There’s a huge group of people (more than 14 million back in 2015) who live in this country as permanent residents or visa holders — and who are not American citizens. And then there are the people who are in the United States without official documentation — and who also deserve clear, accessible health materials that speak to them and meet their needs.

By being intentional with our word choices, we can make sure we include everyone, regardless of their citizenship status. So instead of “Americans” — and depending on the context — consider terms like “people in the United States,” “U.S. adults,” or even simply “people.”

And yes, you may wind up using “Americans” occasionally. It tends to show up in lots of federal public health initiatives, for example. But if you have a go at avoiding it, we think you’ll find it’s pretty easy to do. And when a pretty easy language swap can help more people feel seen and included in health comm… well, we don’t have to tell you!

The bottom line: Unless you’re the President of the United States, you probably don’t need to use the term “Americans” in your work. Instead, consider more inclusive alternatives.

---

Copy/paste to share on social (and tag us!):  According to CommunicateHealth, it’s time to (mostly) ditch the term “Americans” in #HealthComm. Check out this post for more inclusive options: https://communicatehealth.com/wehearthealthliteracy/our-fellow-americans/ #HealthLiteracy #InclusiveLanguage

Remember the early days of the internet? People sat down at desktop computers to “surf the web,” patiently waited for webpages to load over a slow dial-up connection, scrolled through endless blocks of text, and asked Jeeves their burning questions (written out as full questions, mind you). Clearly, things are different now — and we have different expectations for online content. If we can’t find what we need right away, we usually move on to the next search result or social media post.

When health communicators write web content, our job is to help people find the health info they need quickly and easily. Fortunately for us, microcontent can help us reach that goal! On a website or app, a piece of microcontent is a short phrase that encourages people to take action. For example, microcontent might direct readers to move onto a new step or check out a more comprehensive resource. Some of the most common types of microcontent are page titles, headings, subject lines, and links.

These little phrases can make a big difference. Think of microcontent like a school crossing guard. If the crossing guard isn’t good at their job, students might get lost or hurt. Similarly, poorly written microcontent can confuse readers or point them in the wrong direction. A good crossing guard, on the other hand, helps kids get to school safely and efficiently. Similarly, quality microcontent guides people through your site — and helps you leaves a good first impression. When people find what they need without a big to-do, they’ll be more likely to visit your site the next time they need health info.

So today we’ve rounded up some quick tips for writing page titles and headings, 2 of the most common types of microcontent. We’ve covered some of them before, and there are some important overlapping topics here. But we’ve been thinking a lot lately about how little bits of content often have very big jobs — and we could all use a refresher. When writing titles and headings:

• Shorter is better. Concise titles and headings help readers quickly scan your content and find what they’re looking for. This also means less clutter on your beautifully designed health content.
• Make sure they make sense out of context. Imagine someone reposts part of your content on social media. Will the title or heading make sense outside of your site? Though the out-of-context title or heading may not tell the whole story, the answer should generally be yes.
• Limit idioms or expressions. These phrases may be eye-catching to some (and your clever wordplay may impress your editor), but their meaning can easily get lost in translation for readers who speak English as a second language or those who tend to think more literally.
• Put strong keywords first. Putting the phrases that people are likely to search for at the beginning of your page title or heading makes it more likely that people will find your webpage using a search engine — you know, SEO and all. But this approach also helps people scan your content more quickly.
• Think back to your communication objective(s). As you write, ask yourself: What do I want my readers to know and do? Of course that’s important to consider at every stage of the content development process, but here’s your explicit suggestion to keep your comm objective top of mind specifically when writing microcontent — that’s the most important info to sum up in your page title and headings.

For more tips to help you polish up your microcontent, check out this article from Nielsen Norman Group.

 The bottom line: When it comes to writing for the web, small phrases often have big jobs. Try these tips to improve page titles and headings.

---

Copy/paste to share on social (and tag us!): When it comes to writing for the web, little phrases can make a big difference. Write more effective page titles and headings with these #microcontent tips from CommunicateHealth: https://communicatehealth.com/wehearthealthliteracy/microcontent-small-phrases-with-big-jobs/ #HealthComm #HealthLiteracy

If you’ve worked in health communication for more than a hot second, you’ve surely seen the term “social determinants of health” — in fact, you probably see it a lot. And for good reason: Research shows that social determinants of health have a greater impact on people’s health and well-being than medical care.

You may very well think of the term as one you only use with fellow public health or health comm professionals, and we’d agree that that’s mostly been the status quo. But as we get more explicit about the role of inequitable systems in our health communication products — by naming racism (not race!) as a risk factor for disease, for example — we think that’s changing. People deserve real explanations for information we’re giving them, and sometimes that involves communicating about social determinants of health.

The problem, of course, is that “social determinants of health” is a jargon term if there ever was one. Public health folks may use it without a second thought — but for many people, the meaning isn’t at all clear. Maybe you’re even a little fuzzy on the specifics yourself. (And no shame if you are — this is a judgment-free zone, dear readers!)

The good news is that it’s very possible to describe social determinants of health in a much more helpful and less jargon-y way. The next time you’re trying to explain social determinants of health, try something like this on for size:

Social determinants of health (sometimes called SDOH) are conditions in the places where you live, learn, work, and play that can affect your health in lots of different ways. In other words, they’re the non-medical factors that affect health and well-being, and they’re usually outside your control. They include factors like neighborhood and housing safety, air and water quality, experiences with racism and discrimination, and access to all sorts of things — like health care, education, and healthy foods.

The other important thing to remember about social determinants of health is that they’re due to often long-standing policies and systems. So if you have the space in the material you’re working on, we also suggest including an example to really drive that point home. You could say:

Because of things like environmental policies and zoning laws, some neighborhoods have lots of air pollution. If you live in one of these neighborhoods because it’s where you can afford to live, you’re more likely to have breathing problems. You have no control over the unhealthy air that you’re breathing in every day — but it’s having a negative effect on your health. That makes it a social determinant of health.

Playing out an example like this can go a long way in explaining what social determinants of health are — and why they matter. And boy oh boy do they matter.

The bottom line: “Social determinants of health” is a public health buzz term that may not mean much to your audiences. So take the time to clearly explain what they are.

---

Tweet about it: “Social determinants of health” is a public health buzz term if there ever was one — but it’s also super important. @CommunicateHlth says take the time to clearly explain #SDOH: https://bit.ly/3XmTIeY

Happy New Year from all of us at We ❤️ Health Literacy HQ, dear readers! As we get back into the swing of things, we thought it would be nice to kick off 2023 with a movie recommendation. So grab your favorite movie snack and cue up the 2020 documentary Disclosure.

Disclosure comes from the talented minds of director Sam Feder and executive producer Laverne Cox. You may recognize Cox from her trans rights activism or her groundbreaking role on Orange Is the New Black — which led to her becoming the first openly trans person nominated for an Emmy in an acting category.

In the documentary, Cox and Feder frame Hollywood’s representation of trans people in movies and TV shows as a complicated double-edged sword. On the one hand, increasing visibility of trans people is certainly a positive thing. But on the other, that representation has often perpetuated damaging stereotypes.

Disclosure is an honest and powerful examination of how the entertainment industry has portrayed trans people through the years. It fully leans into the uncomfortable parts, forcing us to confront the connection between negative depictions of trans people in movies and TV and real-life mental health effects among members of the trans community. Using media clips and candid interviews with leading trans thinkers and creatives, Disclosure untangles the depictions of trans people and the implications ­of those depictions — while looking critically at how being trans intersects with other identities, like those related to race and class.

As you can tell, there’s a lot to unpack here. And the doc definitely has some helpful reminders for health communicators — for example, about the importance of avoiding (and counteracting!) stereotypes and communicating with empathy. And you know how we’re fond of encouraging you to test your materials with your priority audience — which is, of course, the best way to make sure you’re doing those things? Well, we’re not going to do that today. We won’t even suggest seeking out informal feedback if you don’t have the resources for testing. Nope, not us. Instead, we’ll let Disclosure remind all of us that there’s nothing more informative than hearing from folks directly about their lived experiences.

And finally, we really ❤️ how trans joy shines through Disclosure despite the often-difficult subject matter of the film. Speaking of reminders, we’re living in a time when trans people in this country are under attack, especially young trans people. And as health communicators, we can do our part to foster trans joy by creating resources that center the needs and real-life experiences of trans people.

The bottom line: Watch Disclosure for a deep dive into the history of trans representation in the entertainment industry — plus some helpful reminders for health communicators.

---

Tweet about it: Watch #DisclosureDoc for a deep dive into the history of trans representation in the entertainment industry — plus, says @CommunicateHlth, some helpful reminders for health communicators: https://bit.ly/3CqbAh5 @Disclosure_Doc

Here at We ❤️ Health Literacy HQ, we’ve been talking a lot (a lot a lot) about equity. You probably have been too, our dearest readers! After all, the COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted longstanding inequities that shape health outcomes — inequities rooted in racism, ableism, and other types of discrimination. Talking about ways to center equity in our work is an important first step. But figuring out what equity looks like in real life? That can get tricky. Luckily, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) has some visuals to help us do just that.

Back in 2017, RWJF crafted a simple illustration of 4 people riding bikes to explain the difference between equality and equity. (To sum it up quickly, “equality” means everyone gets the same kind of bike, while “equity” means everyone gets a bike tailored to their needs.) Tons of people told RWJF that the graphic helped them understand and explain the concept of equity, which is great. But the RWJF team didn’t stop there — they decided to make it even better!

This year, RWJF redesigned the graphic to better reflect the organization’s commitment to advancing health equity. They followed a human-centered design process by:

• Conducting a survey of RWJF newsletter subscribers
• Gathering feedback from people who have experienced barriers to access — like people with disabilities and parents of children with disabilities
• Considering how and where people would use the graphic

Based on audience feedback, RWJF both updated the bike image and created an all-new graphic with a crosswalk scene. The crosswalk image shows how curb cuts and accessible traffic signals help everyone cross the street safely. Both graphics paint a more nuanced picture, illustrating how barriers to access impact different groups of people. And RWJF added captions to make the main message crystal clear.

In her blog post about the new visuals, graphic designer Joan Barlow said she strives to approach all design challenges with empathy for her audience. We couldn’t have said it better ourselves — as you may know, we’re big fans of empathy in health comm. And we really appreciate how RWJF used human-centered design to make a helpful visual even better. Hats off!

The bottom line: The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation’s new graphics help us visualize the difference between equality and equity. And the RWJF team used a human-centered design process to create them!

---

Tweet about it: New graphics from @RWJF can help us visualize the difference between equality and #equity. AND the RWJF team used a human-centered design process to create them! @CommunicateHlth explains: https://bit.ly/3FVP9ST #HealthComm #HealthEquity