ArticleCritical public health2019
Applying Mental Model Methods to Characterize Understanding of Gene-Environment Influences: The Case of Podoconiosis in Ethiopia.
Article in Critical public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- [Environmental risks and health literacy: a systematic review].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2024Pooled it
- Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications of Gene-Environment Interaction Research.Genetic epidemiology · 2025Review
- Mental models about heredity among immigrant Latinx adults with limited education from Mexico and Central America.Journal of genetic counseling · 2022Article
- A scoping review of social and behavioral science research to translate genomic discoveries into population health impact.Translational behavioral medicine · 2021Article
- Rural youths' understanding of gene x environmental contributors to heritable health conditions: The case of podoconiosis in Ethiopia.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2018Article
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
Abstract
The rapid pace of genomic discovery has raised public expectation and concerns about the utility of new discoveries and their potential to exacerbate health disparities. Improving literacy concerning gene and environmental (GxE) contributors to disease is needed to avoid commonly observed deterministic misconceptions about genomics. Mental models approaches that incorporate community engagement processes could be used to inform GxE literacy-building interventions. We used a mental models approach to describe and systematically compare expert and lay understanding of GxE interactions, using the example of podoconiosis, a non-infectious lymphedema endemic in highland Ethiopia. Methods included: (1) specifying elicitation questions for a literature review, (2) eliciting an expert model, (3) eliciting a lay model, and (4) comparing the two models. We used a coding scheme to identify lay participants' knowledge gaps, misunderstandings and extra knowledge relative to the expert standard. Results indicated that lay participants' viewed poverty as an important susceptibility factor and considered heredity and contagion to have a joint causal influence. Experts did not endorse either of these viewpoints. Conventional expert-based interventions aimed to correct misconceptions about behaviors important for prevention may be stymied by lay views that social environmental factors have more important influences on health outcomes. GxE literacy interventions that consider multiple levels of influence including social determinants of health and personal resilience to augment health education strategies are needed in diverse settings. Novel communication approaches will be needed to help target audiences disentangle long-held conceptions of heredity and contagion.
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.