IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i18p6742-d414316.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Identifying Issues and Priorities in Reporting Back Environmental Health Data

Author

Listed:
  • Erin Lebow-Skelley

    (HERCULES Exposome Research Center, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA)

  • Sarah Yelton

    (Institute for the Environment, UNC Superfund Research Program, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA)

  • Brandi Janssen

    (Department of Occupational and Environmental Health, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52246, USA)

  • Esther Erdei

    (College of Pharmacy & Mountain West Clinical and Translational Research-Infrastructure Network, UNM Health Sciences Center, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM 87131, USA)

  • Melanie A. Pearson

    (HERCULES Exposome Research Center, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA)

Abstract

Experts recommend reporting environmental exposure results back to research participants and communities, yet environmental health researchers need further guidance to improve the practice of reporting back. We present the results of a workshop developed to identify pertinent issues and areas for action in reporting back environmental health research results. Thirty-five attendees participated, brainstorming responses to the prompt: “What are some specific issues that are relevant to reporting back research results to individuals or the larger community?”, and then grouping responses by similarity and rating their importance. Based on a combined theoretical foundation of grounded theory and qualitative content analysis, we used concept mapping to develop a collective understanding of the issues. Visual maps of the participants’ responses were created using nonmetric multidimensional scaling and hierarchical cluster analysis. The resulting concept map provided a spatial depiction of five issue areas: Effective Communication Strategies, Community Knowledge and Concerns, Uncertainty, Empowering Action, and Institutional Review and Oversight (listed from highest to lowest rating). Through these efforts, we disentangled the complex issues affecting how and whether environmental health research results are reported back to participants and communities, by identifying five distinct themes to guide recommendations and action. Engaging community partners in the process of reporting back emerged as a unifying global theme, which could improve how researchers report back research results by understanding community context to develop effective communication methods and address uncertainty, the ability to act, and institutional concerns about beneficence and justice.

Suggested Citation

  • Erin Lebow-Skelley & Sarah Yelton & Brandi Janssen & Esther Erdei & Melanie A. Pearson, 2020. "Identifying Issues and Priorities in Reporting Back Environmental Health Data," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(18), pages 1-19, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:18:p:6742-:d:414316
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/18/6742/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/18/6742/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wing, S. & Horton, R.A. & Muhammad, N. & Grant, G.R. & Tajik, M. & Thu, K., 2008. "Integrating epidemiology, education, and organizing for environmental justice: Community health effects of industrial hog operations," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 98(8), pages 1390-1397.
    2. Monica D. Ramirez-Andreotta & Julia Green Brody & Nathan Lothrop & Miranda Loh & Paloma I. Beamer & Phil Brown, 2016. "Improving Environmental Health Literacy and Justice through Environmental Exposure Results Communication," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-27, July.
    3. Ahmed, S.M. & Palermo, A.-G.S., 2010. "Community engagement in research: Frameworks for education and peer review," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 100(8), pages 1380-1387.
    4. Kathleen M. Gray, 2018. "From Content Knowledge to Community Change: A Review of Representations of Environmental Health Literacy," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-17, March.
    5. Trochim, William M. K. & Linton, Rhoda, 1986. "Conceptualization for planning and evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 289-308, January.
    6. Brody, J.G. & Morello-Frosch, R. & Brown, P. & Rudel, R.A. & Altman, R.G. & Frye, M. & Osimo, C.A. & Pérez, C. & Seryak, L.M., 2007. ""Is it safe?": New ethics for reporting personal exposures to environmental chemicals," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 97(9), pages 1547-1554.
    7. Trochim, William M., 2017. "Hindsight is 20/20: Reflections on the evolution of concept mapping," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 176-185.
    8. Trochim, William M. K., 1989. "An introduction to concept mapping for planning and evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 1-16, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Julie Von Behren & Michelle Wong & Daniela Morales & Peggy Reynolds & Paul B. English & Gina Solomon, 2022. "Returning Individual Tap Water Testing Results to Research Study Participants after a Wildfire Disaster," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(2), pages 1-13, January.
    2. Erin Polka & Ellen Childs & Alexa Friedman & Kathryn S. Tomsho & Birgit Claus Henn & Madeleine K. Scammell & Chad W. Milando, 2021. "MCR: Open-Source Software to Automate Compilation of Health Study Report-Back," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(11), pages 1-12, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Diana Rohlman & Jamie Donatuto & Myk Heidt & Michael Barton & Larry Campbell & Kim A. Anderson & Molly L. Kile, 2019. "A Case Study Describing a Community-Engaged Approach for Evaluating Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon Exposure in a Native American Community," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-18, January.
    2. McLinden, Daniel, 2017. "And then the internet happened: Thoughts on the future of concept mapping," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 293-300.
    3. Urban, Jennifer Brown & Hargraves, Monica & Trochim, William M., 2014. "Evolutionary Evaluation: Implications for evaluators, researchers, practitioners, funders and the evidence-based program mandate," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 127-139.
    4. Luis Miranda-Gumucio & Ignacio Gil-Pechuán & Daniel Palacios-Marqués, 2013. "An exploratory study of the determinants of switching and loyalty in prepaid cell phone users. An application of concept mapping," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 7(4), pages 603-622, December.
    5. Rosas, Scott R. & Ridings, John W., 2017. "The use of concept mapping in measurement development and evaluation: Application and future directions," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 265-276.
    6. Arthur Moses & Jean E. T. McLain & Aminata Kilungo & Robert A. Root & Leif Abrell & Sanlyn Buxner & Flor Sandoval & Theresa Foley & Miriam Jones & Mónica D. Ramírez-Andreotta, 2022. "Minding the gap: socio-demographic factors linked to the perception of environmental pollution, water harvesting infrastructure, and gardening characteristics," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 12(3), pages 594-610, September.
    7. Andrew R. Binder & Katlyn May & John Murphy & Anna Gross & Elise Carlsten, 2022. "Environmental Health Literacy as Knowing, Feeling, and Believing: Analyzing Linkages between Race, Ethnicity, and Socioeconomic Status and Willingness to Engage in Protective Behaviors against Health ," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(5), pages 1-17, February.
    8. Julie Von Behren & Michelle Wong & Daniela Morales & Peggy Reynolds & Paul B. English & Gina Solomon, 2022. "Returning Individual Tap Water Testing Results to Research Study Participants after a Wildfire Disaster," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(2), pages 1-13, January.
    9. Marti Lindsey & Shaw-Ree Chen & Richmond Ben & Melissa Manoogian & Jordan Spradlin, 2021. "Defining Environmental Health Literacy," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-15, November.
    10. C. Pons-Morera & L. Canós-Darós & I. Gil-Pechuan, 2018. "A model of collaborative innovation between local government and tourism operators," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 12(1), pages 143-168, March.
    11. Menconi, M.E. & Tasso, S. & Santinelli, M. & Grohmann, D., 2020. "A card game to renew urban parks: Face-to-face and online approach for the inclusive involvement of local community," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    12. Trochim, William M., 2017. "Hindsight is 20/20: Reflections on the evolution of concept mapping," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 176-185.
    13. Szijarto, Barbara & Bradley Cousins, J., 2019. "Mapping the practice of developmental evaluation: Insights from a concept mapping study," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 1-1.
    14. Donnelly, James P., 2017. "A systematic review of concept mapping dissertations," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 186-193.
    15. Trochim, William M. & McLinden, Daniel, 2017. "Introduction to a special issue on concept mapping," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 166-175.
    16. Kathryn S. Tomsho & Erin Polka & Stacey Chacker & David Queeley & Marty Alvarez & Madeleine K. Scammell & Karen M. Emmons & Rima E. Rudd & Gary Adamkiewicz, 2022. "Characterizing the Environmental Health Literacy and Sensemaking of Indoor Air Quality of Research Participants," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(4), pages 1-16, February.
    17. Leona F. Davis & Mónica D. Ramirez-Andreotta & Jean E. T. McLain & Aminata Kilungo & Leif Abrell & Sanlyn Buxner, 2018. "Increasing Environmental Health Literacy through Contextual Learning in Communities at Risk," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-23, October.
    18. Diana Rohlman & Molly L. Kile & Veronica L. Irvin, 2022. "Developing a Short Assessment of Environmental Health Literacy (SA-EHL)," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(4), pages 1-15, February.
    19. Jose Ramon Saura & Pedro Palos-Sanchez & Miguel Angel Rios Martin, 2018. "Attitudes Expressed in Online Comments about Environmental Factors in the Tourism Sector: An Exploratory Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-20, March.
    20. Erin Polka & Ellen Childs & Alexa Friedman & Kathryn S. Tomsho & Birgit Claus Henn & Madeleine K. Scammell & Chad W. Milando, 2021. "MCR: Open-Source Software to Automate Compilation of Health Study Report-Back," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(11), pages 1-12, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:18:p:6742-:d:414316. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.