ArticleJournal of community health2014
A qualitative exploration of fishing and fish consumption in the Gullah/Geechee culture.
Article in Journal of community health, 2014. 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.
- 20th Pollutant Responses in Marine Organisms (PRIMO 20): Global issues and fundamental mechanisms caused by pollutant stress in marine and freshwater organisms.Aquatic toxicology (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2020Article
- Longitudinal measures of perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in serum of Gullah African Americans in South Carolina: 2003-2013.Environmental research · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Gullah/Geechee (G/G) heritage is rooted in a culture largely dependent on fish and seafood as a primary food source. Research suggests that African-American (AA) fishers in the Southeastern US consume larger amounts of fish, potentially exposing them to higher environmental contaminant levels. This in-depth study was conducted to explore G/G and AA Sea Island attitudes, perceptions, and cultural beliefs about fishing in one urban and two rural South Carolina coastal counties. Results indicated that study participants in rural counties had slightly different perspectives of fishing (e.g. fishing as an essential dietary supplement) than in urban counties where fishing was viewed more as relaxation. Major misperceptions existed in all counties between fish consumption advisories related to pollution versus harvesting restrictions associated with fishing regulations. Providing clear, culturally tailored health messages regarding fish advisories will promote more informed choices about fish consumption that will minimize potential exposures to environmental pollutants.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24737279What 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.