ArticleFrontiers in public health2026
From perception to action in public health emergencies: a three-gate integrated framework linking risk perception, information engagement, and protective responses.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Public health emergencies often show a gap between heightened risk perception and sustained protective behavior. People may seek large amounts of information yet fail to adopt recommended measures, implement them inconsistently, or abandon them as guidance evolves and fatigue accumulates. To explain these patterned breakdowns, this paper develops an integrated framework linking risk perception and affect to information engagement and, in turn, to protective responses. The framework synthesizes the Protective Action Decision Model and the Risk Information Seeking and Processing model to treat information engagement-exposure, seeking or avoidance, verification, and processing mode-as the primary bridge between perception and action. It further distinguishes three behavioral outcomes that are frequently conflated in crisis research: adoption, implementation quality, and persistence. Building on this integration, we propose that, in voluntary and information-rich public health crises, sustained high-quality protective responses are most likely when three enabling conditions are met: a trust gate that supports acceptance of messengers and institutions, an efficacy gate that converts threat into feasible action pathways under real constraints, and an information ecology gate that preserves comprehension and belief accuracy under overload and misinformation. The framework yields testable propositions about when perceived risk produces calibrated seeking, guideline-consistent action, and sustained routines, as well as identifiable breakdown signatures when any gate is substantially weakened. By translating the model into actionable design principles for communication and intervention, this theory provides a parsimonious account of why response efforts succeed or fail and offers a practical agenda for strengthening public health preparedness in future crises.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.