ArticleEnvironmental research2017
Researcher and institutional review board perspectives on the benefits and challenges of reporting back biomonitoring and environmental exposure results.
Article in Environmental research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 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
38 citing papers in PubMed, 43 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development of personal air pollution exposure report-back materials to Household Air Pollution Intervention Network (HAPIN) trial participants in Guatemala and Rwanda: a qualitative study.BMJ global health · 2025Trial
- Outcomes from Returning Individual versus Only Study-Wide Biomonitoring Results in an Environmental Exposure Study Using the Digital Exposure Report-Back Interface (DERBI).Environmental health perspectives · 2021Trial
- Use of Theory-Driven Report Back to Promote Lung Cancer Risk Reduction.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Trial
- Experiences of clinicians engaged in report-back of individual chemical exposures in two pregnancy cohorts.Environmental health : a global access science source · 2026Article
- Mapping the Landscape of Environmental Health Literacy: Trends, Gaps, and Future Directions.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Review
- "You Feel Empowered": Parents' Emotional Responses to Air Pollution Sensing at Home.Journal of health and social behavior · 2025Article
- Not whether but how: the ethics and Language of reporting back individual results.Environmental health : a global access science source · 2025Article
- PFAS in Rural U.S. Well Water: Using Participatory Science to Identify and Communicate Results to Address Risks.Environmental science & technology · 2025Article
- Participant Experiences with Human Biomonitoring in Communities Affected by Chronic PFAS Environmental Contamination in the Veneto Region (Italy).International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Associations Between Daily-Use Products and Urinary Biomarkers of Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals in Adults of Reproductive Age.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications of Gene-Environment Interaction Research.Genetic epidemiology · 2025Review
- A Personalized Intervention to Increase Environmental Health Literacy and Readiness to Change in a Northern Nevada Population: Effects of Environmental Chemical Exposure Report-Back.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
- Development and Outcomes of Returning Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon Exposure Results in the Washington Heights, NYC Community.Environmental health insights · 2024Article
- Moving Forward with Reporting Back Individual Environmental Health Research Results.Environmental health perspectives · 2023Article
- Health and Psychological Concerns of Communities Affected by Per- and Poly-Fluoroalkyl Substances: The Case of Residents Living in the Orange Area of the Veneto Region.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Report-Back of Personal Air Sampling Results and Study Participants' Perceived Knowledge, Attitudes, and Awareness of Air Pollution.Environmental health perspectives · 2023Article
- Integrating participant feedback and concerns to improve community and individual level chemical exposure assessment reports.BMC public health · 2023Article
- Translating community-based participatory research into broadscale sociopolitical change: insights from a coalition of women firefighters, scientists, and environmental health advocates.Environmental health : a global access science source · 2023Article
- Article
- Participant engagement to develop report-back materials for personal air monitoring.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2023Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
As the number of personal exposure studies expands and trends favor greater openness and transparency in the health sciences, ethical issues arise around reporting back individual results for contaminants without clear health guidelines. Past research demonstrates that research participants want their results even when the health implications are not known. The experiences of researchers and institutional review boards (IRBs) in studies that have reported personal chemical exposures can provide insights about ethical and practical approaches while also revealing areas of continued uncertainty. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 17 researchers and nine IRB members from seven personal exposure studies across the United States to investigate their experiences and attitudes about the report-back process. Researchers reported multiple benefits of report-back, including increasing retention and recruitment, advancing environmental health literacy, empowering study participants to take actions to reduce exposures, encouraging shifts in government and industry practices, and helping researchers discover sources of exposure through participant consultation. Researchers also reported challenges, including maintaining ongoing contact with participants, adopting protocols for notification of high exposures to chemicals without health guidelines, developing meaningful report-back materials, and resource limitations. IRB members reported concern for potential harm to participants, such as anxiety about personal results and counterproductive behavior changes. In contrast, researchers who have conducted personal report-back in their studies said that participants did not appear overly alarmed and noted that worry can be a positive outcome to motivate action to reduce harmful exposures. While key concerns raised during the early days of report-back have been substantially resolved for scientists with report-back experience, areas of uncertainty remain. These include ethical tensions surrounding the responsibility of researchers to leverage study results and resources to assist participants in policy or community-level actions to reduce chemical exposures, and how to navigate report-back to vulnerable populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.