NemoClaw Knowledge Wiki

Enhancing effective healthcare communication in Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand: Considerations for research, teaching, policy, and practice

26 min read

🗂️ AI & Agents · View mindmap

preface_schema: ‘1.0’ title: ‘Page 1’ source_type: ‘Consulting Company’ publisher: ‘pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov’ publishing_date: ‘Unknown’ authors: [] available_at: ‘https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10562187/’ availability_status: ‘available’ availability_http_code: ‘200’ availability_checked_at: ” availability_note: ” source_integrity_flag: ‘verified’ credibility_tier_value: ‘3’ credibility_tier_key: ‘pre-print’ credibility_tier_label: ‘Pre-Print’ credibility_reason: ‘preprint_markers’ credibility: ‘Final Pre-Print Report’ journal_ranking_source: ‘n/a’ journal_sourceid: ” journal_title: ” journal_issn: ” journal_sjr: ‘0.0’ journal_quartile: ” journal_rank_global: ‘0’ journal_categories: ” journal_areas: ” journal_high_ranked: ‘False’ journal_match_method: ‘none’ journal_match_confidence: ‘0.0’ keywords: [‘data’, ‘action’, ‘effectively’, ‘communicating’, ‘population’, ‘health’, ‘market’, ‘research’] abstract: ’## Page 1 From Data to Action: Effectively Communicating Population Health and Market Research Findings to Diverse Australian Audiences Executive Summary Communicating complex health and market research into clear, actionable messages is vital for ensuring evidence actually influences policy, practice and public behaviour . Decisions in healthcare, policy and community settings depend on data-driven insights, so researchers must plan dissemination from the outset . Key strategies include tailoring messages to each audience, using plain language and compelling visuals, and choosing appropriate channels (print, presentations, digital media) for policymakers, clinicians, managers, community groups and the general public . For example, policy briefs distil evidence and implications for decision-makers, while plain-language summaries help non-experts understand findings . Digital tools (websites, social media, infographics) now offer powerful two-way platforms to reach broad and niche audiences Embedding evaluation metrics – such as media coverage,

rstand findings . Digital tools (websites, social media, infographics) now offer powerful two-way platforms to reach broad and niche audiences Embedding evaluation metrics – such as media coverage, downloads, policy citations or practice change – helps track impact and refine communication strategies over time . In sum, effective resear’

Page 1

From Data to Action: Effectively Communicating Population Health and Market Research Findings to Diverse Australian Audiences Executive Summary Communicating complex health and market research into clear, actionable messages is vital for ensuring evidence actually influences policy, practice and public behaviour . Decisions in healthcare, policy and community settings depend on data-driven insights, so researchers must plan dissemination from the outset . Key strategies include tailoring messages to each audience, using plain language and compelling visuals, and choosing appropriate channels (print, presentations, digital media) for policymakers, clinicians, managers, community groups and the general public . For example, policy briefs distil evidence and implications for decision-makers, while plain-language summaries help non-experts understand findings . Digital tools (websites, social media, infographics) now offer powerful two-way platforms to reach broad and niche audiences Embedding evaluation metrics – such as media coverage, downloads, policy citations or practice change – helps track impact and refine communication strategies over time . In sum, effective research communication is deliberate, evidence-based and audience-centred: it involves clear key messages, simple language, cultural sensitivity, engaging visuals, and multiple tailored formats to transform data into action Principles of Effective Research Communication Successful research communication follows fundamental principles of clarity, credibility, relevance and reciprocity. Clarity and simplicity are paramount: key messages should be dire

rch Communication Successful research communication follows fundamental principles of clarity, credibility, relevance and reciprocity. Clarity and simplicity are paramount: key messages should be direct, concise, action- oriented and free of unnecessary jargon . Communication should use “plain language” so that non-specialists (policymakers, community members) can grasp findings without misinterpretation . For example, avoid acronyms and medical terms wherever possible, or explain them in simple terms . In Australia, official writing guides (e.g. Australian Government Writing Guide ) encourage researchers to replace complex words with common alternatives (“apoptosis” → “how cells die”, “efficacy” → “works”) and to keep sentence structure simple. Relevance and focus are also key: communications should highlight why the research matters (public health impact, policy implications, cost savings) and include a clear “call to action” . Messages must be targeted and tailored – one-size-fits-all rarely works. As a WHO framework notes, messages should account for each audience’s needs, timing and preferences [Infographic/Figure content omitted in strict text-only mode.]

Page 2

s-all rarely works. As a WHO framework notes, messages should account for each audience’s needs, timing and preferences [Infographic/Figure content omitted in strict text-only mode.]

Page 2

principles – rooted in communication theory and practice – underpin every practical strategy in this guide Identifying and Understanding Target Audiences in Australian Health Each stakeholder group has distinct needs, values and preferred channels. Policymakers (government health officials, public servants, elected officials) need evidence framed in terms of public benefit, cost- effectiveness and policy feasibility. They often have limited time, so prefer concise summaries or briefs highlighting actionable recommendations . Policymakers value clear estimates (e.g. natural frequencies of risk ), a balanced presentation of costs/benefits, and alignment with current policy agendas. Clinicians and health professionals (doctors, nurses, allied health) want data that is directly relevant to patient care or public health practice. They look for credible, peer-reviewed evidence, clinical guidelines, and case examples. Clinicians often favor professional formats (journals, conferences, hospital presentations) and appreciate evidence accompanied by practical implementation tips or protocols. Engaging clinicians may require demonstrating how findings improve patient outcomes or workflow efficiency. Health service managers and administrators (hospital executives, program managers) focus on system-level outcomes – for example, resource use, quality indicators, regulatory compliance or community satisfaction. They seek information on cost implications, implementation strategies, and performance metrics. Brief executive summaries, dashboards or management reports that highlight ROI or benchmark comparisons can capture their attention. Researchers and academics expect detailed methodology, statistical rigor and novelty; they communicate mainly through academic publications, co

OI or benchmark comparisons can capture their attention. Researchers and academics expect detailed methodology, statistical rigor and novelty; they communicate mainly through academic publications, conferences and professional networks. When communicating to peers, emphasize data and evidence, citing literature; but remember to frame significance in broader terms (e.g. how this fills a gap or challenges assumptions) to broaden reach. Consumers and patients form another key audience. This includes health service users, families, and the general public. They benefit from messages that are highly accessible, relevant to everyday life, and empowering. Plain-language fact sheets, infographics and community workshops are effective. For instance, a visual roadmap of key findings (symptom guidelines, healthy behaviors) can be more impactful than a technical report. Consumer groups may also include self-help organizations, patient advocates and community leaders. Engaging these stakeholders often involves listening to their concerns, using empathetic storytelling and demonstrating respect for lived experiences. Community groups, especially culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) communities and First Nations peoples, have additional considerations. Australia’s multicultural population brings diverse languages, beliefs and health practices . Research communication must be culturally competent – for example, using translation or bilingual materials, and partnering with community organizations or trusted leaders to convey messages. Queensland Health guidelines highlight that many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people speak English as a second language or dialect, so communicators should “avoid complex words and jargon, explain questions and words, and use diagrams or images to explain concepts” . Building rapport (the “person before business” approach) and respecting cultural norms (e.g. storytelling traditions, group decision-making) are essential when

or images to explain concepts” . Building rapport (the “person before business” approach) and respecting cultural norms (e.g. storytelling traditions, group decision-making) are essential when presenting to Indigenous or other CALD audiences The media (journalists, broadcasters, health reporters) is also a distinct audience. Media professionals look for newsworthy angles: novelty, human impact, or controversy. To engage media, researchers should frame findings in terms of real-world stories or urgent health issues, and be prepared to provide clear soundbites and visuals. Press releases and media kits should be written in accessible language and highlight the “so what?” – why the story matters to the broader public . Media outlets vary:

Page 3

specialized health journalists will appreciate data context, whereas general media may need a highly simplified narrative with relatable examples. In identifying audiences, consider where they fit on the “process of behavior change” spectrum . For example, an informed clinician ready to act requires a different message than a layperson just becoming aware of a health risk. A communication needs assessment (through surveys or interviews) can clarify audience literacy levels and preferences . In practice, mapping stakeholders early (policy, professional, community) and consulting with representatives (e.g. holding a community advisory group meeting) ensures messages resonate. Ultimately, knowing the audience shapes all decisions about tone, content and channels. By investing time in audience analysis—considering factors like health literacy, cultural background, role, and incentives—communicators can significantly increase the relevance and uptake of research findings Tailoring Communication Strategies and Messages for Different Audiences Once audiences are defined, each message and medium should be customized. Language and framing: For technical audiences (scientists, clinicians, analysts), use dis

and Messages for Different Audiences Once audiences are defined, each message and medium should be customized. Language and framing: For technical audiences (scientists, clinicians, analysts), use discipline-specific terminology and detailed data. For non-technical audiences, emphasize big-picture insights and practical takeaways. For example, policymakers may respond to statements like “This intervention could reduce hospitalisations by 20%,” whereas community members might respond better to stories about individuals benefiting from the intervention. Framing data in familiar contexts (using analogies, local examples or culturally- relevant metaphors) helps diverse groups relate. For instance, to explain risk to the general public, communicate in terms of relatable frequencies or scenarios (e.g. “like 15 out of every 100 people”) instead of abstract percentages Format and style: Tailoring also means choosing the right format. Busy decision-makers often prefer one-page briefs or slide decks with bullet points and charts, whereas clinicians might read a detailed report or attend a seminar. Visual content (charts, infographics, videos) is generally more engaging for lay and general audiences, while tables of statistics might be acceptable in a technical appendix. For Indigenous and CALD communities, consider oral and visual formats (community radio segments, translated brochures, or cultural theatre) in addition to written materials. The medium influences the style: as the NHMRC notes, email or official reports can use more technical language, but social media posts and public flyers should simplify vocabulary . Always think “what does this audience already know, and what action do we want them to take?” Tone and voice: Adapt formality and tone. Policymakers may expect formal, objective reports, whereas community forums benefit from a conversational and respectful style. When speaking with Indigenous communities, use respectful, relationship-oriented commun

y expect formal, objective reports, whereas community forums benefit from a conversational and respectful style. When speaking with Indigenous communities, use respectful, relationship-oriented communication (for example, sharing some personal background to build trust ). Using positive and empowering language tends to be more effective than fear-based messages, except when urgency is needed (and even then, balance is key). The scoping review of health communication emphasizes that negative or loss-framed content can sometimes prompt action more than positive framing , but it must be used judiciously to avoid alarm without solution. Engagement and co-creation: Beyond tailoring messages, involve representatives of the audience in developing communications. Co-production (such as including consumer advocates on research teams or holding a roundtable with clinicians) ensures messages address real concerns. For example, involving nurses in drafting a guideline summary might highlight practical care issues they face (as in an NHMRC example where nurses focused on patient education while GPs cared about clinical treatments ).

Page 4

fting a guideline summary might highlight practical care issues they face (as in an NHMRC example where nurses focused on patient education while GPs cared about clinical treatments ).

Page 4

Such involvement not only refines content but also builds early buy-in. Similarly, community advisory boards can guide how to present culturally sensitive findings. In essence, tailoring is iterative: test drafts with a sample audience, solicit feedback, and adjust wording or emphasis. Multiple channels: Use a mix of channels tailored to each group (the “communication mix”). Policymakers might be reached through policy forums, briefings or a policy blog; clinicians via professional conferences or clinical networks; communities via social media, local events or partnerships with NGOs. The NHMRC guide highlights that combining dissemination methods yields better results than any single approach . For instance, a journal article might be accompanied by a conference talk, a press release, a podcast interview, and social media posts. Social media can especially amplify reach if used properly: platforms like Twitter (X) or LinkedIn may catch the eye of professionals and journalists, while Facebook or Instagram could engage patients or younger demographics. However, tailor each social media message (hash-tagged threads for professionals, infographics for public audiences ). In summary, effective tailoring means adjusting what you say, how you say it, and where you say it for each audience. As one review notes, “targeting and tailoring messages to the audience seems essential” . By analyzing audience motivations and barriers, and then crafting custom narratives and tactics for each, researchers can greatly increase the impact of their communication efforts. Written Communication Written materials remain fundamental for deep communication. This includes formal reports and publications, policy briefs, executive summaries, plain-language summaries, and media releases. Ea

ication Written materials remain fundamental for deep communication. This includes formal reports and publications, policy briefs, executive summaries, plain-language summaries, and media releases. Each has its own structure and style: Academic Publications: Peer-reviewed articles, technical reports and journals require rigorous methods and thorough analysis. For specialist audiences, maintain scientific rigor and transparency. However, even academic writing can benefit from clarity: concise abstracts and well-structured sections (Introduction, Methods, etc.) aid understanding. Use of headings, tables and figures can make data more accessible. When possible, provide a lay summary or alt-text for figures. Cite relevant literature to build credibility. Technical Reports: Often longer than journal articles, reports (e.g. government or consultancy reports) allow space for background, detailed methods, and appendices. Include an executive summary up front that briefly states objectives, key findings, and recommendations (no more than a page). The main body should be organized with clear headings and bullet points where helpful. Always highlight actionable conclusions. For instance, list “Policy implications” or “Recommendations” as distinct sections. Reports should be formatted for readability (legible fonts, graphs/charts where appropriate) Policy Briefs: Policy briefs are concise (1–4 pages) documents aimed at decision-makers They distill the evidence into non-technical language, outline the problem, summarize key evidence, and explicitly state implications for policy. A typical structure: (1) title and summary of issue, (2) background/context, (3) evidence or findings, (4) implications/recommendations, (5) sources/contacts. As the Prevention Centre advises, a policy brief distils relevant research and draws out implications for policy . Use bold headings and bullet lists, and keep it focused on [Infographic/Figure content omitted in strict text-only mode.]

policy brief distils relevant research and draws out implications for policy . Use bold headings and bullet lists, and keep it focused on [Infographic/Figure content omitted in strict text-only mode.]

Page 5

statistics, a simple graph of quit rates, and bullet-pointed policy options (“Increase taxes on tobacco, expand school programs, etc.”) Plain Language (Lay) Summaries: These are short (200–500 word) summaries written for the general public. A well-written plain summary answers: What was done? Why does it matter? What are the results and implications? Avoid jargon at all costs . Use active voice and concrete language. The NIHR (UK) advises: “avoid jargon, abbreviations and technical terms,” use common words and short sentences . For example, instead of “randomized controlled trial showed a 15% relative risk reduction,” write “in a clinical study, patients who received Treatment X were healthier than those who did not.” Tools like readability checkers can help (aim for ~8th grade reading level). The study of clinical trial communications found that plain summaries were perceived as easier to understand and more reliable by lay readers . Many journals now encourage or require such summaries for public reporting. Technical Summaries or Executive Summaries: For stakeholders who need more detail than a brief, but less than a full report, use a summary document (2–5 pages) that explains methods and context more fully. These can include short sections on methods, results, and caveats, still in clear language. Summaries should highlight only the most salient findings and use visuals (charts, infographics) to illustrate data where possible. Insert call-out boxes for “Key messages” or “Implications for [target group]”. Checklists and Tips: Across all written formats, adhere to the audience’s style: government reports often have strict style guides (reference [76†L298-L303] for Australian plain writing rules). Use bullet points and

Across all written formats, adhere to the audience’s style: government reports often have strict style guides (reference [76†L298-L303] for Australian plain writing rules). Use bullet points and numbered lists for clarity. Ensure logical flow, and include an introduction that orients the reader. Providing references or links for further reading adds credibility. Enlist peers or target-audience members to review drafts for readability. In practice, a combination of written products is effective. For example, a research project might produce (a) a peer-reviewed article, (b) a plain-language summary for participants/consumers, (c) a one- page policy brief, and (d) a press release. The NHMRC dissemination guide reminds us that different formats complement each other . Always consider translation needs: if reaching CALD [Infographic/Figure content omitted in strict text-only mode.]

Page 6

contrasting colors for readability. During the talk, explain the data verbally so that even a distracted listener captures the point Design principles: Follow slide design “best practices.” Use a large, legible font and high-contrast colors. Keep clutter to a minimum: avoid long paragraphs on slides – they compete with your speech. Kristen Naegle’s “Ten Simple Rules for Slides” remind us to employ graphics effectively: “almost never have slides that only contain text. Build your slides around good visualizations” . Use diagrams, [Infographic/Figure content omitted in strict text-only mode.]

Page 7

show diet changes. Refer to style guides (such as the Clinical Excellence Commission’s guide) which emphasize selecting charts that reveal key insights [Infographic/Figure content omitted in strict text-only mode.]

Page 8

e guides (such as the Clinical Excellence Commission’s guide) which emphasize selecting charts that reveal key insights [Infographic/Figure content omitted in strict text-only mode.]

Page 8

ensure relevance, and plan dissemination as a project outcome. This integrated KT approach ensures the eventual messaging is grounded in stakeholder needs . Use strategies like co-creation workshops or knowledge brokers to facilitate dialogue between researchers and decision-makers. Strategic framing of evidence: Structure and package evidence to be actionable. The policy scoping review notes that evidence should be “structured and packaged in a way that is actionable and relevant for policy-makers, including information on competing interests and other sources” . This might involve summarizing research in policy formats, or explicitly aligning findings with current policy debates. Policy “windows” (timing opportunities, like new legislation) should be seized by preparing briefing notes in advance. Knowledge mobilisation approaches: As the Prevention Centre highlights, many strategies fall under KT/KM . These include:

  • Dissemination: Traditional sharing (reports, presentations, media releases) plus digital sharing (webinars, social media). Use the “diffusion” approach for broad awareness.
  • Implementation: Develop tools or training that help practitioners apply the findings (e.g. clinical protocols, decision aids, or health promotion toolkits). For instance, training sessions in a clinic to adopt a new screening guideline.
  • Networking and brokering: Facilitate connections between researchers and stakeholders. A knowledge broker (or liaison person) can translate technical language and promote dialogue. Building communities of practice (forums where professionals share learnings) embeds research into routine discussion.
  • Co-production: Partner with government or NGOs to adapt research into programs. For example, collaborate with a local health department

als share learnings) embeds research into routine discussion.

  • Co-production: Partner with government or NGOs to adapt research into programs. For example, collaborate with a local health department to pilot an intervention, providing real-world feedback and accelerating adoption.
  • Advocacy: Work with advocacy groups or media to raise public support for policy change based on the research.
  • Exchange and capacity-building: Offer workshops or training that help decision-makers interpret and use evidence. Teaching health economists or administrators to understand economic models can make research uptake more feasible. Effective KT/KM often uses multiple strategies simultaneously. The literature suggests combined approaches outperform single methods . For example, a strategic plan might blend a policy brief and stakeholder meeting (to lobby policy-makers), community engagement and media coverage (to build public support), and implementation guides (to help service providers). A “systems thinking” mindset is helpful: map the health system’s actors and influences, and tailor strategies to key leverage points In Australia, structures like the National Health and Medical Research Council’s (NHMRC) Knowledge Translation Strategy promote such activities (e.g. funding KT grants, requiring research translation plans) . Researchers should also be aware of models like the Knowledge-to-Action framework, which outline iterative steps from synthesis to evaluation. Ultimately, knowledge translation is the multifaceted effort of moving from “knowing” to “doing.” By combining tailored communications with partnerships, policy engagement, and practice support, researchers can significantly increase the chances that their work changes health outcomes

Page 9

combining tailored communications with partnerships, policy engagement, and practice support, researchers can significantly increase the chances that their work changes health outcomes

Page 9

Engaging with Media Working effectively with the media amplifies research impact to the public and policy arena. Key practices for media engagement include clarity, timeliness and preparation. Prepare core messages: Before any media interaction, distill your research into 2–3 clear points. Phrase them in everyday language and include a compelling statistic or story. Practice delivering these as soundbites. For example: “One of our findings is that 70% of rural clinics lack telehealth capability – highlighting an urgent equity issue.” Stick to positive action-focused messaging when possible (“X will help improve Y”), but be ready to honestly acknowledge uncertainty or limitations. Media-friendly materials: Draft a press release or media fact sheet that summarizes the study in non- technical terms. Start with a concise headline and lead paragraph that hook attention. Include context (why the topic matters in Australia) and quotes from a credible voice (researcher or end-user). Press releases should be no longer than 1–2 pages and avoid jargon. Provide high-quality visuals or infographics when possible – media often use images if readily available. Send media materials proactively to outlets covering health, local news (if regionally relevant), or science journalists. The NHMRC dissemination guide notes that press releases “can be posted on the media centre page and sent directly to journalists,” ensuring broad reach Engage with journalists: Understand that journalists work on deadlines; be responsive and concise. Offer experts for interviews and be transparent about your credentials and affiliations. During interviews, avoid academic language – imagine explaining your work to an interested cousin. Anticipate questions (e.g. “How does this affect

parent about your credentials and affiliations. During interviews, avoid academic language – imagine explaining your work to an interested cousin. Anticipate questions (e.g. “How does this affect me?”) and prepare clear answers. If confronted with complex data, have analogies ready (“that’s about the same fraction of people as the crowd in the MCG”). Also be ready to ‘pivot’ – bridge every answer back to your main messages. Use various media formats: In addition to press releases, consider writing opinion pieces or letters to the editor on related policy issues (especially around election or budgeting times). Give media-friendly presentations: speak at press conferences or webinars open to journalists, or record short videos explaining the study. For social media and web, craft digestible content: e.g. a tweet thread with charts, or a blog post summarizing findings in relatable scenarios. Ensure that any claims in social media posts are accurate and sourced, to maintain trust. Timing and ethics: Time media engagement to news cycles. If your research has timely relevance (e.g. new COVID-19 data), reach out when it’s topical. Also, consider embargoes: allow journalists early access under embargo so stories can be prepared in advance, but do not breach agreed confidentiality. Always maintain honesty – overhyping results can damage credibility. If a finding is preliminary or uncertain, emphasize that careful evaluation is ongoing. Building relationships: Cultivate long-term relationships with health journalists. Attend media trainings (many universities offer workshops on science communication). Follow journalists’ work to understand what they value. The Science journal advises that “authors should engage with media outlets” and provides tips on interviews and writing news releases . By helping journalists “get it right” – for example, offering clear explanations of statistical terms – researchers build a reputation as reliable source

interviews and writing news releases . By helping journalists “get it right” – for example, offering clear explanations of statistical terms – researchers build a reputation as reliable sources. In sum, engaging with media means translating your findings into the language of news and public interest. Accurate, story-driven communication through press releases, interviews, and op-eds can bring research insights to policy-makers and the public, greatly expanding the reach of your work.

Page 10

Using Digital Platforms and Social Media for Research Dissemination Digital media have transformed how researchers communicate. Websites, social networks, blogs, podcasts and apps allow direct, interactive engagement with broad audiences . A strategic digital plan should complement traditional dissemination. Websites and blogs: Maintain a project or lab website where reports, summaries and multimedia content are hosted. Ensure it is navigable (e.g. clear menu, searchable archives) and mobile-friendly. A regularly updated blog or news section can highlight new findings with minimal delay. Use simple URLs and SEO-friendly language so stakeholders can find the information. If possible, include a “Subscribe” option for newsletters. For broader exposure, post lay summaries of research on institutional or national health portals. Email newsletters and e-zines: Curated email updates can reach policymakers, clinicians and interested citizens on an opt-in basis. These allow longer narratives than social media. For example, a state health department newsletter might feature a section on recent research findings, with a link to a longer report. Tailor emails to segments of your audience: clinicians might subscribe to professional newsletters, whereas community members to a consumer health news list. Social media: Platforms like Twitter (X), Facebook, LinkedIn, Instagram and YouTube can vastly increase visibility when used skillfully. On Twitter, researchers often shar

a consumer health news list. Social media: Platforms like Twitter (X), Facebook, LinkedIn, Instagram and YouTube can vastly increase visibility when used skillfully. On Twitter, researchers often share preprints or paper links, using relevant hashtags (#PublicHealth, AusHealth) and tagging influencers. Keep posts succinct (platform character [Infographic/Figure content omitted in strict text-only mode.]

Page 11

Security and ethics: Digital communication must respect confidentiality and copyright. Obtain consent before posting identifiable information. Be mindful of institutional policies on social media and any embargoes on unpublished data. Overall, digital platforms should not replace personal contact but amplify it. A combined offline-online strategy is best: mention your website and social handles in printed materials, and reference publications in your tweets. As the technology-savvy generation matures, being active online ensures your research remains accessible and dynamic, keeping pace with how people consume information today. Evaluating the Impact of Research Communication Efforts Measuring the reach and effect of communication is critical but challenging. Evaluation should track both outputs (what we did) and outcomes (what changed). Common metrics and methods include: Reach and engagement: Track quantitative indicators like downloads of reports, open rates for newsletters, page views on the project website, and social media metrics (likes, shares, tweet impressions) . Altmetric scores (aggregating mentions in news and social media) give a quick sense of online attention . While high numbers don’t prove impact, they show whether audiences found the content. Stakeholder feedback: Conduct surveys or interviews with target audiences. For example, after distributing a policy brief, survey policymakers or staff on its clarity and usefulness. Community feedback can be obtained via focus groups or public forums (e.g. asking patients if the communica

ter distributing a policy brief, survey policymakers or staff on its clarity and usefulness. Community feedback can be obtained via focus groups or public forums (e.g. asking patients if the communication helped them understand an issue). This qualitative data reveals whether messages were understood and culturally appropriate. Media coverage and citation tracking: Monitor mentions in media articles and policy documents. Tools like Google Alerts or media monitoring services can record when and how research is reported. In the policy arena, track if studies are cited in government reports, clinical guidelines or parliamentary debates. A large-scale analysis shows research influence by analyzing citations in policy documents . Seeing your findings inform a policy or program is strong impact evidence. Behavioral and system outcomes: Ultimately, effective communication aims for action. Though attribution is hard, look for changes such as increased uptake of an intervention, new funding, or practice changes that align with the research recommendations. For example, if a research communication campaign focused on vaccination and later vaccination rates rose significantly in target communities, this suggests impact. Often this requires longer-term monitoring (through health statistics, audits or pre-post evaluations) and ideally a pre-defined logic model linking communication to outcomes. Altmetrics and scholarly metrics: In research terms, increased citations of a paper, invited presentations, or new collaborations may indicate academic impact. Altmetrics help here too: studies suggest that higher online attention often correlates with later citations Reflections and logbooks: Keep an “impact log” or diary of dissemination activities and responses. Record events (e.g. “conference talk on June 5, 2024; attendees: 80; follow-up requests: 5”), meetings with policymakers and any commitments made. This informal tracking complements formal metrics and can remind the tea

conference talk on June 5, 2024; attendees: 80; follow-up requests: 5”), meetings with policymakers and any commitments made. This informal tracking complements formal metrics and can remind the team of lessons learned. • • • • • •

Page 12

While no single measure captures “impact,” combining them gives a picture of effectiveness. For example, a communications evaluation plan might include: tracking a dissemination indicator (e.g. [Infographic/Figure content omitted in strict text-only mode.]

Page 13

Enhancing effective healthcare communication in Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand: Considerations for research, teaching, policy, and practice - PMC https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10562187/ Communicating effectively with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people https://www.health.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0021/151923/communicating.pdf monash.edu https://www.monash.edu/__data/assets/pdf_file/0016/2553001/Best-Practice-Data-Visualisation-Report-1_4.pdf Ten simple rules for effective presentation slides | PLOS Computational Biology https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009554 Visualising Medical Research: Exploring the Influence of Infographics on Professional Dissemination

Societal and scientific impact of policy research: A large-scale … https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157724000439

Graph View

Backlinks