ArticlePloS one2017
Presenting information on regulation values improves the public's sense of safety: Perceived mercury risk in fish and shellfish and its effects on consumption intention.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Frequency of consumption of different fish, crustacean and mollusc species contributing to methylmercury exposure and consumer awareness of national advice on their consumption.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2026Article
- NtLYK5 negatively regulates drought resistance in tobacco through HPlant cell reports · 2025Article
- Validation of a New Liquid Asymmetric-Electrode Plasma Optical Emission Spectroscopy (LAEP-OES) Method for Measurement of Total Mercury in Tuna.Journal of AOAC International · 2024Article
- Factors Influencing Consumption Behaviour towards Aquatic Food among Asian Consumers: A Systematic Scoping Review.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Omega-3 Long-Chain Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids Intake in Children: The Role of Family-Related Social Determinants.Nutrients · 2020Article
- Article
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
Risk communication aims to promote health and understanding through information exchange; however, explanations regarding the basis of regulation values for the public are insufficient. Moreover, it is unclear how information presentation affects the public's sense of safety and their consumption intentions. We first investigated the relationship between perception of mercury-risk in fish and shellfish and individual attributes and knowledge. We then examined how presenting information on regulation values and primary factors regarding perception affected sense of safety toward regulations and food-consumption intentions. An online survey was conducted with Japanese individuals (N = 1148). Respondents were randomly assigned to one of three groups based on the presentation level of regulation values. People who frequently consumed tuna had a high perception of dread risk of mercury. This suggests that the dread risk perception of mercury does not determine tuna-type consumption behavior; rather, individuals' consumption behavior determines dread risk perception of mercury. Among those with high tuna-type consumption, those receiving information that a safety factor of 10 times had been considered showed a significantly greater sense of safety than did the group that was not presented with information on regulation values (odds ratio (95% confidence interval): 2.04 (1.18-3.53), p < 0.05). However, presentation of regulation values showed a weak but significantly positive correlation with excessive intake of tuna-type fish (odds ratio: 2.95 (0.93-9.32), p < 0.10). Presenting the information on regulation values increases sense of safety; however, it may also lead to excessive intake.
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.