Despite the availability of crisis and risk communication best practices, scholars have analyzed and described the global COVID-19 pandemic communication failures that led to mass confusion about disease dynamics and appropriate protective behaviors. In this study, we sought to understand the alignment of crisis and risk communication best practices with national and international organizational lessons learned from COVID-19 pandemic responses. Our study design was a summative content analysis of a purposeful sample of COVID-19 lessons learned and recommendations reports published by US or international organizations between March 2020 and June 2024. Forty-four organizations published 61 reports, with 331 recommendations (24%) aligned with communication strategies, practices, behaviors, or actions. We identified 612 full or partial statements that aligned with at least 1 of 12 crisis and risk communication best practices. Alignment between the 12 crisis and risk communication best practices and report recommendations varied by best practice. "Take a process approach" was the best practice that aligned most frequently with recommendations and "explain risk in plain language" and show "an ethic of care" were the least frequently aligned with recommendations. Word cloud analyses showed alignment between best practice definitions and report recommendations. Our findings indicate that despite the critical nature of the work to inform the public, there is little international consensus on the use of 12 crisis and risk communication best practices that represent consolidated evidence about what works. Organizations' own reports and our analysis provide the blueprint for future robust crisis and risk communication emergency responses, if the organizations heed their own advice. We recommend that in advance of the next pandemic, organizations at all levels prioritize building awareness of and planning with these 12 best practices so they are prepared to fully listen to and respond to public's information needs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Baur et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: