ArticleJournal of the National Medical Association2002
Environmental factors influencing public health and medicine: policy implications.
Article in Journal of the National Medical Association, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Physicians' ethical responsibilities in relation to the climate and further environmental crises: a review of academic publications.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2026Review
- An Initial Assessment of a Forgotten Minority Community: Key Informant's Perceptions of Environmental Health in Fresno, Texas.Californian journal of health promotion · 2006Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Environmental health threats are increasing throughout the United States, particularly in low-income populations and in communities of color. Environmental science researchers are investigating plausible associations between the environment and human health. As a result, the role and responsibility of the primary care physicians and other health care providers are changing. This paper highlights selected lines of evidence suggesting that clinicians should now consider interactions between humans and their environment as central to providing effective primary care. Subject areas include: exposure to environmental agents, reproductive toxicity, pulmonary disease, neurobehavioral toxicity, endocrine disruptors, mechanisms of environmental disease, and cultural competence. Concerns about these and other environmentally related issues influence the manner in which primary care is practiced now, and will be practiced in the future. Biomedical technology and community awareness demand that physicians pay more attention to advances in environmental medicine. Ironically, one of the least taught subjects in medical school is environmental medicine. To effectively respond to growing concerns about the role of the environment in human health, clinicians, researchers, educators, public policy officials, and the general public must join together to reduce the risk of environmental health threats and improve quality of life.
Indexed as
Identifiers
11995631PMC2594229What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.