Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30445602›Full record

ArticleJournal of radiation research2019

Intention to return to the town of Tomioka in residents 7 years after the accident at Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station: a cross-sectional study.

Hitomi Matsunaga, Makiko Orita, Keita Iyama, Nana Sato, Satoko Aso, Fumika Tateishi, Yasuyuki Taira, Takashi Kudo, Shunichi Yamashita, Noboru Takamura

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of radiation research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Why Do They Not Come Home? Three Cases of Fukushima Nuclear Accident Evacuees.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Hitomi MatsunagaDepartment of Global Health, Medicine and Welfare, Atomic Bomb Disease Institute, Nagasaki University Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, 1-12-4 Sakamoto, Nagasaki, Japan.
Makiko OritaDepartment of Global Health, Medicine and Welfare, Atomic Bomb Disease Institute, Nagasaki University Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, 1-12-4 Sakamoto, Nagasaki, Japan.
Keita IyamaDepartment of Global Health, Medicine and Welfare, Atomic Bomb Disease Institute, Nagasaki University Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, 1-12-4 Sakamoto, Nagasaki, Japan.
Nana SatoDepartment of Global Health, Medicine and Welfare, Atomic Bomb Disease Institute, Nagasaki University Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, 1-12-4 Sakamoto, Nagasaki, Japan.
Satoko AsoDepartment of Global Health, Medicine and Welfare, Atomic Bomb Disease Institute, Nagasaki University Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, 1-12-4 Sakamoto, Nagasaki, Japan.
Fumika TateishiDepartment of Global Health, Medicine and Welfare, Atomic Bomb Disease Institute, Nagasaki University Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, 1-12-4 Sakamoto, Nagasaki, Japan.
Yasuyuki TairaDepartment of Global Health, Medicine and Welfare, Atomic Bomb Disease Institute, Nagasaki University Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, 1-12-4 Sakamoto, Nagasaki, Japan.
Takashi KudoDepartment of Isotope Medicine, Atomic Bomb Disease Institute, Nagasaki University Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, 1-12-4 Sakamoto, Nagasaki, Japan.
Shunichi YamashitaDepartment of Radiation Medical Sciences, Atomic Bomb Disease Institute, Nagasaki University Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, 1-12-4 Sakamoto, Nagasaki, Japan.
Noboru TakamuraDepartment of Global Health, Medicine and Welfare, Atomic Bomb Disease Institute, Nagasaki University Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, 1-12-4 Sakamoto, Nagasaki, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of our study was to identify the factors associated with intention to return (ITR) in residents of Tomioka town, Fukushima Prefecture. We contacted approximated 8000 residents aged 20 years or older who lived in Tomioka. We invited them to take part in a written survey on ITR. In all, 1749 residents' replies were included in the analysis. We asked about ITR in former residents of Tomioka town. We also asked about relevant factors and about risk perception in relation to the health effects of radiation exposure. Of those contacted, 469 (26.8%) had an ITR. Logistic regression analysis revealed that being male (OR = 1.6, 95% Cl: 1.24-1.96, P < 0.001), the anticipation of improving shopping in the town (OR = 1.5, 95% Cl: 1.26-1.67, P < 0.001) and requests for individual consultation with experts on the health effects of radiation (OR = 2.7, 95% Cl: 2.10-3.48, P <0.001) were associated with the ITR (+), and living with children under 18 years of age (OR = 0.7, 95% Cl: 0.51-0.95, P = 0.023), reluctance to drink tap water (OR = 0.5, 95% Cl: 0.36-0.69, P < 0.001) and anxiety regarding genetic effects of radiation in the next generation (OR = 0.6, 95% Cl: 0.45-079, P <0.001) were associated with the ITR (-) to Tomioka town, independent of other covariates. To allay the anxieties of residents who have an ITR to their hometown, careful risk communication, including information on the potential effects of radiation on health, is important.

Indexed as

Fukushima Nuclear AccidentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleGeographyHumansJapanLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedRadiation ExposureRisk FactorsYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID30445602
PMCPMC6373670

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.