About this item:

66 Views | 51 Downloads

Author Notes:

Erin Lebow-Skelley, Email: elebows@emory.edu

Conceptualization, E.L.-S. and M.A.P.; methodology, E.L.-S. and M.A.P.; formal analysis, E.L.-S. and M.A.P.; investigation, E.L.-S. and M.A.P.; writing—original draft preparation, E.L.-S., S.Y., B.J., E.E., M.A.P.; writing—review and editing, E.L.-S., S.Y., B.J., E.E., M.A.P.; visualization, E.L.-S.; supervision, M.A.P.; project administration, E.L.-S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

We thank Liam O’Fallon (NIEHS) and Michelle Kegler (Emory University) for their input on planning the PEPH workshop on which this manuscript is based, as well as Liam O’Fallon’s valuable feedback on the manuscript itself. We also acknowledge the contributions of all PEPH Concept Mapping workshop attendees.

The authors declare no conflict of interest. Role of funder: The authors consulted with Liam O’Fallon, coordinator for the Partnerships for Environmental Public Health program at NIEHS (funder), when planning the PEPH Concept Mapping Workshop and to review the completed manuscript.

Subject:

Research Funding:

This work was funded by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (P30 ES019776, P42ES031007, P30 ES005605, and 1P50ES026102).

Keywords:

  • concept mapping
  • research report-back
  • environmental health
  • community engagement

Identifying Issues and Priorities in Reporting Back Environmental Health Data

Tools:

Journal Title:

International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health

Volume:

Volume 17, Number 18

Publisher:

Type of Work:

Article | Final Publisher PDF

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.

Copyright information:

© 2020 by the authors.

This is an Open Access work distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/rdf).
Export to EndNote