Last data update: Jan 13, 2025. (Total: 48570 publications since 2009)
Records 1-4 (of 4 Records) |
Query Trace: Telfer JL[original query] |
---|
Use of personal hearing protection devices at loud athletic or entertainment events among adults - United States, 2018
Eichwald J , Scinicariello F , Telfer JL , Carroll YI . MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2018 67 (41) 1151-1155 Tens of millions of U.S. residents have a range of adverse health outcomes caused by noise exposure (1). During 2011-2012, 21 million U.S. adults who reported no exposure to loud or very loud noise at work exhibited hearing damage suggestive of noise-induced hearing loss (2). In addition to the known risk for hearing damage, nonauditory adverse health outcomes and health risks from excessive environmental sound exposure can include effects on the cardiovascular system, metabolism, blood pressure, body weight, cognition, sleep, mental health, quality of life, and overall well-being (1,3,4). CDC analyzed a representative sample of the U.S. adult population (aged >/=18 years) from a 2018 national marketing survey (50 states and the District of Columbia) that included questions about use of hearing protection devices (HPDs) (e.g., ear plugs or ear muffs) during recreational exposure to loud athletic and entertainment events; approximately 8% of respondents reported consistent use of an HPD at these types of events. Among those adults more likely to wear an HPD, 63.8% had at least some college education, and 49.1% had higher income levels. Women and older adults were significantly less likely to use HPDs. These findings suggest a need to strengthen a public health focus on the adverse health effects of excessive noise exposure at home and in recreational settings as well as a need for continued efforts to raise public awareness about the protective value of HPDs. |
Lessons of risk communication and health promotion - West Africa and United States
Bedrosian SR , Young CE , Smith LA , Cox JD , Manning C , Pechta L , Telfer JL , Gaines-McCollom M , Harben K , Holmes W , Lubell KM , McQuiston JH , Nordlund K , O'Connor J , Reynolds BS , Schindelar JA , Shelley G , Daniel KL . MMWR Suppl 2016 65 (3) 68-74 During the response to the 2014-2016 Ebola virus disease (Ebola) epidemic in West Africa, CDC addressed the disease on two fronts: in the epidemic epicenter of West Africa and at home in the United States. Different needs drove the demand for information in these two regions. The severity of the epidemic was reflected not only in lives lost but also in the amount of fear, misinformation, and stigma that it generated worldwide. CDC helped increase awareness, promoted actions to stop the spread of Ebola, and coordinated CDC communication efforts with multiple international and domestic partners. CDC, with input from partners, vastly increased the number of Ebola communication materials for groups with different needs, levels of health literacy, and cultural preferences. CDC deployed health communicators to West Africa to support ministries of health in developing and disseminating clear, science-based messages and promoting science-based behavioral interventions. Partnerships in West Africa with local radio, television, and cell phone businesses made possible the dissemination of messages appropriate for maximum effect. CDC and its partners communicated evolving science and risk in a culturally appropriate way to motivate persons to adapt their behavior and prevent infection with and spread of Ebola virus. Acknowledging what is and is not known is key to effective risk communication, and CDC worked with partners to integrate health promotion and behavioral and cultural knowledge into the response to increase awareness of the actual risk for Ebola and to promote protective actions and specific steps to stop its spread. The activities summarized in this report would not have been possible without collaboration with many U.S. and international partners (http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/outbreaks/2014-west-africa/partners.html). |
Ebola and its control in Liberia, 2014-2015
Nyenswah TG , Kateh F , Bawo L , Massaquoi M , Gbanyan M , Fallah M , Nagbe TK , Karsor KK , Wesseh CS , Sieh S , Gasasira A , Graaff P , Hensley L , Rosling H , Lo T , Pillai SK , Gupta N , Montgomery JM , Ransom RL , Williams D , Laney AS , Lindblade KA , Slutsker L , Telfer JL , Christie A , Mahoney F , De Cock KM . Emerg Infect Dis 2016 22 (2) 169-77 The severe epidemic of Ebola virus disease in Liberia started in March 2014. On May 9, 2015, the World Health Organization declared Liberia free of Ebola, 42 days after safe burial of the last known case-patient. However, another 6 cases occurred during June-July; on September 3, 2015, the country was again declared free of Ebola. Liberia had by then reported 10,672 cases of Ebola and 4,808 deaths, 37.0% and 42.6%, respectively, of the 28,103 cases and 11,290 deaths reported from the 3 countries that were heavily affected at that time. Essential components of the response included government leadership and sense of urgency, coordinated international assistance, sound technical work, flexibility guided by epidemiologic data, transparency and effective communication, and efforts by communities themselves. Priorities after the epidemic include surveillance in case of resurgence, restoration of health services, infection control in healthcare settings, and strengthening of basic public health systems. |
Disaster preparation: lessons from Japan
Coleman CN , Simon SL , Noska MA , Telfer JL , Bowman T . Science 2011 332 (6036) 1379 On 11 March 2011, the earthquake and tsunami in Japan claimed thousands of lives, disrupted the lives of hundreds of thousands, and destroyed regional power and transportation infrastructure. Backup systems intended to maintain cooling for three operating nuclear reactors and the spent-fuel pools failed. Experts in various technical fields from Japan, the United States, and around the world worked to understand and mitigate the consequences of unplanned releases of radioactivity. As a team of U.S. health and medical subject matter experts deployed to Japan in the early days after the tsunami, we have identified the elements that remain most challenging in preparing for future disasters. |
- Page last reviewed:Feb 1, 2024
- Page last updated:Jan 13, 2025
- Content source:
- Powered by CDC PHGKB Infrastructure