ArticleBMC public health2019
Residents' perceptions of radon health risks: a qualitative study.
Article in BMC public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 38 citations in OpenAlex.
- Understanding residential socioeconomic and behavioral patterns for home air radon testing: a population-based intervention study in New Hampshire and Vermont (USA).Environmental health : a global access science source · 2026Article
- Empowering communities: the impact of citizen science on radon measurement and mitigation.Radiation and environmental biophysics · 2026Article
- Beyond Communication and Risk in a Post-Pandemic World: A Survey on Radon in Spain.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Radon Risk Communication through News Stories: A Multi-Perspective Approach.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
- Public library lending programs increase radon testing in rural communities.Library & information science research · 2024Article
- Using the precaution adoption process model and the health belief model to understand radon testing and mitigation: a pre-post quasi-experimental study.BMC public health · 2023Article
- Co-Designing Communication: A Design Thinking Approach Applied to Radon Health Communication.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Residents' perception and worldview about radon control policy in Canada: A pro-equity social justice lens.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- The efficacy of public health information for encouraging radon gas awareness and testing varies by audience age, sex and profession.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Radon risk perception and barriers for residential radon testing in Southwestern Nigeria.Public health in practice (Oxford, England) · 2020Article
- A Mixed Methods Population Health Approach to Explore Radon-Induced Lung Cancer Risk Perception in Canada.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRadon is a high impact environmental pollutant and is the second leading cause of lung cancer in Canada. Building design, extended winter, and geographical location expose residents of Ottawa-Gatineau (the national capital region in Canada) to an increased risk. It is surprising that residents have an inadequate awareness of the risk - despite its gravity - and have taken minimum preventive actions. This study explores perceptions of radon health risk and examines the factors that enable and hinder the adoption of preventive measures among Ottawa-Gatineau residents.
methodsWe conducted semi-structured interviews with 35 residents with varying educational and income levels to inquire about their knowledge and perception of radon, and to explore their views of enablers and obstacles to taking action to reduce radon risks. Thematic, inductive data analysis was undertaken.
resultsThe results indicate that: 1) Residents obtained information on radon from various sources that include the media, their education or occupation, their social network, and home renovation events. Limited references were made to the National Radon Program responsible for testing for radon and informing residents. 2) Awareness of radon risk varied, and the knowledge retained by some residents is insufficient to adequately protect their health. 3) Enablers for taking protective action included: having an understanding of the risk along with health consciousness; caring for family and children; knowing others who had contracted lung cancer and having financial resources. Obstacles consisted of: lack of awareness; cost; lack of home ownership; and potential difficulty in selling the house. 4) Residents attributed primary responsibility to public agencies for disseminating information, and incentivizing or mandating action through more stringent regulation.
conclusionRisk perceptions are subjective, and are influenced by micro and macro level factors. Inducing protective action to reduce risk requires comprehensive interventions taking into account the dual cognitive and emotional aspects of risk perception. Future research may explore the dual aspects of risk perception and examine the contents of the risk communication message. Policy should address the responsibility of both governments and residents in tackling the issue.
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.