ArticleScience, technology & human values2018
Strongly Participatory Science and Knowledge Justice in an Environmentally Contested Region.
Article in Science, technology & human values, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Contesting state expertise after COVID-19.Public understanding of science (Bristol, England) · 2026Article
- The societal impact of Open Science: a scoping review.Royal Society open science · 2024Article
- Creating safety amidst chronic contamination: A mixed-method analysis of residents' experiences in a Southern Italian steel town.Social science & medicine (1982) · 2024Article
- Pathways for diversifying and enhancing science advocacy.Science advances · 2023Review
- Problems of knowledge, problems of order: the open science field site.Frontiers in sociology · 2023Article
- Dynamics of cumulative advantage and threats to equity in open science: a scoping review.Royal Society open science · 2022Article
- Alleviating Environmental Health Disparities Through Community Science and Data Integration.Frontiers in sustainable food systems · 2021Article
- Participatory Research for Environmental Justice: A Critical Interpretive Synthesis.Environmental health perspectives · 2021Review
- Collaborative Workshops for Community Meaning-Making and Data Analyses: How Focus Groups Strengthen Data by Enhancing Understanding and Promoting Use.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This article draws insights from a case study examining unanswered health questions of residents in two polluted towns in an industrial region in southern France. A participatory health study, as conducted by the author, is presented as a way to address undone science by providing the residents with relevant data supporting their illness claims. Local residents were included in the health survey process, from the formulation of the questions to the final data analysis. Through this strongly participatory science (SPS) process, the townspeople offered many creative ideas in the final report for how the data could be used to assist in improving their health and environment and policy work is already in evidence, resulting from the study. Drawing from the literature on participatory science and expertise as well as from the initial outcomes of the local health study, I propose that SPS produces a form of knowledge justice. Understanding knowledge and its making as part of a social justice agenda aligns well with environmental justice frames. Through SPS, local residents have a hermeneutical resource to make sense of their embodied lives and augment their claims with strong data supporting actions for improving their health and environment.
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.