Social Marketing Risk‐Framing Approaches for Dental Sealants in Rural American Indian Children. Issue 6 (2nd June 2015)
- Record Type:
- Journal Article
- Title:
- Social Marketing Risk‐Framing Approaches for Dental Sealants in Rural American Indian Children. Issue 6 (2nd June 2015)
- Main Title:
- Social Marketing Risk‐Framing Approaches for Dental Sealants in Rural American Indian Children
- Authors:
- Larsson, Laura S.
Champine, Dorothy
Hoyt, Dee
Lin, Lillian
Salois, Emily
Silvas, Sharon
Tail, Terri Weasel
Williams, Matthew - Abstract:
- <abstract abstract-type="main" id="phn12203-abs-0001"> <title>Abstract</title> <sec id="phn12203-sec-0001" sec-type="section"> <title>Objective</title> <p>To compare three variants of a culturally relevant and theoretically based message to determine the most influential risk‐framing approach for improving intention to place dental sealants for preschool children.</p> </sec> <sec id="phn12203-sec-0002" sec-type="section"> <title>Design and Sample</title> <p>A convenience sample of adult, American Indian participants (<italic>n</italic> = 89) attending a community health fair were assigned to view a gain‐framed, loss‐framed, or mix‐framed dental sealant message.</p> </sec> <sec id="phn12203-sec-0003" sec-type="section"> <title>Measures</title> <p>We compared participants' scores on a 46‐item survey to determine the relative effect of the frame assignment on seven indices of behavior change.</p> </sec> <sec id="phn12203-sec-0004" sec-type="section"> <title>Results</title> <p>The mean difference in participants' stage‐of‐change scores (x = 1.17, <italic>n</italic> = 89, <italic>SD</italic> = 1.90) demonstrated a significant improvement for all groups after watching the dental sealant message <italic>t</italic><sub>88</sub> = 5.81, <italic>p</italic> &lt; .0001, 95% CI [0.77–1.57]. Self‐efficacy was the only construct for which we detected a statistically significant difference as a function of frame assignment. Overall, the mix‐framed message resulted in the highest scores. The<abstract abstract-type="main" id="phn12203-abs-0001"> <title>Abstract</title> <sec id="phn12203-sec-0001" sec-type="section"> <title>Objective</title> <p>To compare three variants of a culturally relevant and theoretically based message to determine the most influential risk‐framing approach for improving intention to place dental sealants for preschool children.</p> </sec> <sec id="phn12203-sec-0002" sec-type="section"> <title>Design and Sample</title> <p>A convenience sample of adult, American Indian participants (<italic>n</italic> = 89) attending a community health fair were assigned to view a gain‐framed, loss‐framed, or mix‐framed dental sealant message.</p> </sec> <sec id="phn12203-sec-0003" sec-type="section"> <title>Measures</title> <p>We compared participants' scores on a 46‐item survey to determine the relative effect of the frame assignment on seven indices of behavior change.</p> </sec> <sec id="phn12203-sec-0004" sec-type="section"> <title>Results</title> <p>The mean difference in participants' stage‐of‐change scores (x = 1.17, <italic>n</italic> = 89, <italic>SD</italic> = 1.90) demonstrated a significant improvement for all groups after watching the dental sealant message <italic>t</italic><sub>88</sub> = 5.81, <italic>p</italic> &lt; .0001, 95% CI [0.77–1.57]. Self‐efficacy was the only construct for which we detected a statistically significant difference as a function of frame assignment. Overall, the mix‐framed message resulted in the highest scores. The gain‐framed message was the least influential on four constructs. This finding is in contrast to findings that gain‐framed oral health messages are most influential (Gallagher &amp; Updegraff, 2012; O'Keefe &amp; Jensen, 2007).</p> </sec> <sec id="phn12203-sec-0005" sec-type="section"> <title>Conclusions</title> <p>Community advisory board members determined to use the mix‐framed approach in an oral health social marketing campaign with a rural, American Indian audience.</p> </sec> </abstract> … (more)
- Is Part Of:
- Public health nursing. Volume 32:Issue 6(2015)
- Journal:
- Public health nursing
- Issue:
- Volume 32:Issue 6(2015)
- Issue Display:
- Volume 32, Issue 6 (2015)
- Year:
- 2015
- Volume:
- 32
- Issue:
- 6
- Issue Sort Value:
- 2015-0032-0006-0000
- Page Start:
- 662
- Page End:
- 670
- Publication Date:
- 2015-06-02
- Subjects:
- Public health nursing -- Periodicals
610.734 - Journal URLs:
- http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/%28ISSN%291525-1446 ↗
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/member/institutions/issuelist.asp?journal=phn ↗
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/ ↗
http://firstsearch.oclc.org ↗
http://firstsearch.oclc.org/journal=0737-1209;screen=info;ECOIP ↗ - DOI:
- 10.1111/phn.12203 ↗
- Languages:
- English
- ISSNs:
- 0737-1209
- Deposit Type:
- Legaldeposit
- View Content:
- Available online (eLD content is only available in our Reading Rooms) ↗
- Physical Locations:
- British Library DSC - 6964.760000
British Library DSC - BLDSS-3PM
British Library HMNTS - ELD Digital store - Ingest File:
- 3046.xml