Abstract
Public health services often have to deal with reported clusters of adverse health events. An important characteristic of disease clusters is that the involved community often is concerned about environmental factors influencing health. To facilitate cluster investigations, a stepwise protocol was developed in the Netherlands, based on international literature. Essential is the two-way approach, consisting of a disease-track and an environment-track. Attention to potential environmental exposures is as important as attention to the reported diseases, not only because environmental pollution often is the reason of public concern and thus relevant for risk communication, but also for deciding about the boundaries of the population at risk. Moreover, environmental information is necessary for judgement of the plausibility of a causal relation and for advising measures to prevent exposure. Within this two-way approach, three stages are distinguished: orientation stage, verification stage and quantification stage. Only if an increased risk as well as an elevated exposure is verified, under certain conditions a case–control study may be useful to study causality between exposure and adverse health events. During all stages of the investigation, good risk communication strategies have to be taken into account. However, even then it might be difficult to prevent conflicts, because of the differing interests between experts and the community involved. One of the most important aspects that determine judgements about risks by threatened people, is controllability; that is why community participation is essential. Therefore it can be concluded that cluster management is a mutual endeavour for experts, public and media, where experts are judged on three characteristics: expertise, credibility and empathy.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Centers for Disease Control. Guidelines for investigating clusters of health events. MMWR 1990; 39: 1–23.
Drijver M, Melse JM. Disease clusters and environmental contamination: A guide for public health services (in Dutch). T Soc Gezondheidsz 1992; 70: 565–570.
Fischhoff B. Risk perception and communication unplugged: Twenty years of process. Risk Analysis 1995; 15: 137–145.
National Research Council. Improving risk communication. Washington, D.C., USA: National Academy Press, 1989.
Hance BJ, Chess C, Sandman PM. Industry risk communication manual. Improving dialogue with communities. Lewis Publishers, 1990.
Liston AJ. Risk communication and health protection. In: W. Leiss (ed), Prospects and problems in risk communication. Waterloo, Ontario, Canada: University of Waterloo Press, 1989.
Slovic P, Flynn J, Mertz CK and Mullican L. Health-risk perception in Canada. A research report to the department of national health and welfare, Canada 1993.
Renn O, Burns WJ, Kasperson JX, Kasperson RE, Slovic P. The social amplification of risk: Theoretical foundations and empirical applications. Journal of Social Issues 1992; 48: 137–160.
Forsythe RH. Risk: Reality versus perception. Poultry Science 1993; 72: 1152–1156.
Wilkins L, Patterson P. Risky business: Covering slow-onset hazards as rapidly developing news. Political Communication and Persuasion 1990; 7: 11–23.
Neutra RR. Epidemiology for and with a distrustful community. Environmental Health Perspectives 1985; 62: 93–97.
Cole DC, Tarasuk V, Frank JW, Eyles J. Research responses to outbreaks of concern about local environments. Archives of Environmental Health 1996; 51: 352–358.
Graber DR, Aldrich TE. Working with community organizations to evaluate potential disease clusters. Soc Sci Med 1993; 37: 1079–1085.
Thomas DC. The problem of multiple inference in identifying point-source environmental hazards. Env Health Persp 1985; 62: 407–414.
Melse JM, Drijver M. Disease clusters and environmental contamination: Inventory of statistical methods and backgrounds of cluster research (In Dutch). T Soc Gezondheidsz 1992; 70: 624–630.
Rothman KJ. A sobering start for the cluster buster's conference. Am J Epidemiol 1990; 132; S6–13.
Bross ID. Why proof of safety is much more difficult than proof of hazard. Biometrics 1985; 41: 785–793.
Millard SP. Proof of safety versus proof of hazard. Biometrics 1987; 43: 719–725.
Neutra RR. Counterpoint from a cluster buster. Am J Epidemiol 1990; 132: 1–8.
Mulder YM, Drijver M, Kreis IA. Case-control study on the association between a cluster of childhood haematopoietic malignancies and local environmental factors in Aalsmeer, The Netherlands. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 1994; 48: 161–165.
Lynn FM and Busenberg GJ. Citizin advisory committees and environmental policy: What we know, what's left to discover. Risk Analysis 1995; 15: 147–162.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Drijver, M., Woudenberg, F. Cluster management and the role of concerned communities and the media. Eur J Epidemiol 15, 863–869 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007534317825
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007534317825