CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 46Disaster Response and ManagementDisaster Management and ResiliencePublic Relations and Crisis Communication

Household Preparedness and Preferred Communication Channels in Public Health Emergencies: A Cross-Sectional Survey of Residents in an Asian Developed Urban City

Open access
Tam, Greta, Huang, Zhe, Chan, Emily Ying Yang·2018·International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
DOI 10.3390/ijerph15081598PMC PMC6121418
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Disaster awareness and household preparedness are crucial for reducing the negative effects of a disaster. This study aims to examine the citizens’ preparedness level in the event of a general disaster or outbreak of infectious disease and to identify suitable channels for community disease surveillance and risk communication. We used a stratified random design to conduct a digit-dialed telephone survey in Hong Kong during February 2014. Level of disaster preparedness was examined according to the possession of disaster kit items. Associations between socio-demographic factors and good household preparedness were assessed using multiple logistic regression models. Preferences for infectious disease surveillance were collected and analyzed. There were 1020 respondents. Over half of the respondents (59.2%) had good household preparedness. After adjustment, female respondents, having higher education and higher household income were significantly associated with good household preparedness. Television and telephone were the preferred channels to obtain and report infectious disease information, respectively. In conclusion, general and specific infectious-disease household preparedness levels in Hong Kong were generally good. Tailored preparedness programs targeted to specific communities are necessary for those lacking preparedness. Risk communication and public health surveillance should be conducted through television and telephone, respectively.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/ijerph15081598

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • This result exceeds numbers from the Philippines and Thailand, where 50% and only 14.4% of the population stockpile food, as well as from Hong Kong, where 57.3% store food.

    “This result exceeds numbers from, e.g. the Philippines and Thailand, where 50% and only 14.4% of the population stockpile food (Hoffmann and Muttarak 2017), as well as from Hong Kong, where 57.3% store food (Tam et al. 2018).”

    From Disaster preparedness and resilience at household level in Yangon, Myanmar (2022) · cites this paper as Tam et al. 2018

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 28

  1. [2]Thomas T.N. Leander-Griffith M. Harp V. Cioffi J.P. Influences of preparedness knowledge and beliefs on household disaster preparedness MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly. Rep. 2015 64 965 971 10.15585/mmwr.mm6435a2 26356729 · DOI
  2. [10]Chan E.Y. Yue J. Lee P. Wang S.S. Socio-demographic Predictors for Urban Community Disaster Health Risk Perception and Household Based Preparedness in a Chinese Urban City PLoS Curr. Disasters 2016 8 10.1371/currents.dis.287fb7fee6f9f4521af441a236c2d519 28856059 PMC5569964 · DOI
  3. [14]Hung L.S. The SARS epidemic in Hong Kong: What lessons have we learned? J. R. Soc. Med. 2003 96 374 378 10.1177/014107680309600803 12893851 PMC539564 · DOI
  4. [16]Bao C.-J. Cui L.-B. Zhou M.-H. Hong L. Gao G.F. Wang H. Live-animal markets and influenza A (H7N9) virus infection N. Engl. J. Med. 2013 368 2337 2339 10.1056/NEJMc1306100 23697471 · DOI
  5. [21]Chan E.Y. Cheng C.K. Tam G. Huang Z. Lee P. Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of Hong Kong population towards human A/H7N9 influenza pandemic preparedness, China, 2014 BMC Public Health 2015 15 1 10.1186/s12889-015-2245-9 26395243 PMC4579795 · DOI
  6. [24]Yu H. Cowling B.J. Feng L. Lau E.H. Liao Q. Tsang T.K. Peng Z. Wu P. Liu F. Fang V.J. Human infection with avian influenza A H7N9 virus: An assessment of clinical severity Lancet 2013 382 138 145 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)61207-6 23803487 PMC3801178 · DOI
  7. [25]Wu P. Fang V.J. Liao Q. Ng D.M. Wu J.T. Leung G.M. Fielding R. Cowling B.J. Responses to threat of influenza A (H7N9) and support for live poultry markets, Hong Kong, 2013 Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2014 20 882 10.3201/eid2005.131859 24750988 PMC4012820 · DOI
  8. [28]Fung O.W.M. Loke A.Y. Disaster preparedness of families with young children in Hong Kong Scand. J. Public Health 2010 38 880 888 10.1177/1403494810382477 20817655 · DOI
  9. [29]Chan E.Y. Kim J.H. Griffiths S.M. Lau J.T. Yu I. Does living density matter for nonfatal unintentional home injury in Asian urban settings? Evidence from Hong Kong J. Urban Health 2009 86 872 886 10.1007/s11524-009-9389-9 19636708 PMC2791815 · DOI
  10. [30]Chan E.Y. Kim J.H. Ng Q. Griffiths S. Lau J. A descriptive study of nonfatal, unintentional home-based injury in urban settings: Evidence from Hong Kong Asia-Pac. J. Public Health 2008 20 39 48 19533860
  11. [32]Kapucu N. Culture of preparedness: Household disaster preparedness Disaster Prev. Manag. 2008 17 526 535 10.1108/09653560810901773 · DOI · Paper page
  12. [33]Phillips B.D. Metz W.C. Nieves L.A. Disaster threat: Preparedness and potential response of the lowest income quartile Glob. Environ. Chang. Part B Environ. Hazards 2005 6 123 133 10.1016/j.hazards.2006.05.001 · DOI
  13. [34]Ferguson N.M. Cummings D.A. Cauchemez S. Fraser C. Riley S. Meeyai A. Iamsirithaworn S. Burke D.S. Strategies for containing an emerging influenza pandemic in Southeast Asia Nature 2005 437 209 214 10.1038/nature04017 16079797 · DOI
  14. [36]Black A.J. House T. Keeling M.J. Ross J.V. Epidemiological consequences of household-based antiviral prophylaxis for pandemic influenza J. R. Soc. Interface 2013 10 20121019 10.1098/rsif.2012.1019 23389899 PMC3627116 · DOI
  15. [37]Marshall H. Ryan P. Roberton D. Street J. Watson M. Pandemic influenza and community preparedness Am. J. Public Health 2009 99 S365 S371 10.2105/AJPH.2008.153056 19797751 PMC4504368 · DOI
  16. [42]Tomio J. Sato H. Matsuda Y. Koga T. Mizumura H. Household and Community Disaster Preparedness in Japanese Provincial City: A Population-Based Household Survey Adv. Anthropol. 2014 4 68 10.4236/aa.2014.42010 · DOI
  17. [43]DeBastiani S.D. Strine T.W. Vagi S.J. Barnett D.J. Kahn E.B. Preparedness Perceptions, Sociodemographic Characteristics, and Level of Household Preparedness for Public Health Emergencies: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, 2006–2010 Health Secur. 2015 13 317 326 10.1089/hs.2014.0093 26348094 PMC8080098 · DOI
  18. [44]Mohammad-pajooh E. Ab Aziz K. Investigating factors for disaster preparedness among residents of Kuala Lumpur Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss. 2014 2 3683 3709 10.5194/nhessd-2-3683-2014 · DOI
  19. [45]Botzen W. Aerts J. Van Den Bergh J. Dependence of flood risk perceptions on socioeconomic and objective risk factors Water Resour. Res. 2009 45 10.1029/2009WR007743 · DOI
  20. [46]Smith D.L. Notaro S.J. Personal emergency preparedness for people with disabilities from the 2006–2007 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Disabil. Health J. 2009 2 86 94 10.1016/j.dhjo.2009.01.001 21122746 · DOI
  21. [47]Becker J.S. Paton D. Johnston D.M. Ronan K.R. Salient beliefs about earthquake hazards and household preparedness Risk Anal. 2013 33 1710 1727 10.1111/risa.12014 23339741 · DOI
  22. [49]Manganello J.A. Gerstner G. Pergolino K. Graham Y. Strogatz D. Understanding Digital Technology Access and Use Among New York State Residents to Enhance Dissemination of Health Information JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2016 2 10.2196/publichealth.4442 27227163 PMC4873304 · DOI
  23. [50]Eastwood K. Durrheim D. Francis J.L. d’Espaignet E.T. Duncan S. Islam F. Speare R. Knowledge about pandemic influenza and compliance with containment measures among Australians Bull. World Health Organ. 2009 87 588 594 10.2471/BLT.08.060772 19705008 PMC2733278 · DOI
  24. [51]Van Deursen A.J. van Dijk J.A. Internet skill levels increase, but gaps widen: A longitudinal cross-sectional analysis (2010–2013) among the Dutch population Inf. Commun. Soc. 2015 18 782 797 10.1080/1369118X.2014.994544 · DOI
  25. [52]Chan E.Y. Huang Z. Mark C.K. Guo C. Weather information acquisition and health significance during extreme cold weather in a subtropical city: A cross-sectional survey in Hong Kong Int. J.Disaster Risk Sci. 2017 8 134 144 10.1007/s13753-017-0127-8 · DOI
  26. [53]Hill J.H. Burge S. Haring A. Young R.A. Communication technology access, use, and preferences among primary care patients: From the Residency Research Network of Texas (RRNeT) J. Am. Board Fam. Med. 2012 25 625 634 10.3122/jabfm.2012.05.120043 22956698 · DOI
  27. [54]Glass D.C. Kelsall H.L. Slegers C. Forbes A.B. Loff B. Zion D. Fritschi L. A telephone survey of factors affecting willingness to participate in health research surveys BMC Public Health 2015 15 1017 10.1186/s12889-015-2350-9 26438148 PMC4594742 · DOI
  28. [55]Bradley D.T. McFarland M. Clarke M. The Effectiveness of Disaster Risk Communication: A Systematic Review of Intervention Studies PLoS Curr. Disasters 2014 6 10.1371/currents.dis.349062e0db1048bb9fc3a3fa67d8a4f8 25642365 PMC4172473 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tam, G., Huang, Z., & Chan, E. Y. Y.
Affiliations
Chinese University of Hong Kong (HK)
Corresponding author
Chan, Emily Ying Yang
ORCID
Venue
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2018-07-27
Volume
15
Issue
8
Pages
1598
ISSN
1660-4601 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3390/ijerph15081598
PMC
PMC6121418
OpenAlex
W2884480340
Cited by
46
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 3
FWCI
5.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • Oxford University Research Archive (ORA) (University of Oxford) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Research Fund for the Control of Infectious Disease, Food and Health Bureau, Government of the Hong Kong SAR (CU-13-01-01)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Disaster Response and Management
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Disaster Management and Resilience
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Public Relations and Crisis Communication
Keywords
household preparedness, disaster preparedness, infectious disease outbreaks, risk communication, communication channels, disease surveillance, sociodemographic factors, Hong Kong residents, public health emergencies
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Communicable Diseases, Communication, Cross-Sectional Studies, Disaster Planning, Disasters, Emergencies, Family Characteristics, Female, Hong Kong, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Logistic Models, Asian People, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review