ArticleJournal of health communication2020
"You Gotta Choose Your Words Carefully": Findings from Interviews with Environmental Health Scientists about Their Research Translation Perceptions and Training Needs.
Article in Journal of health communication, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Scientists are trained to communicate research in a technical manner but often lack the skills to communicate scientific findings to the general public. Effective communication and research translation are increasingly important competencies for researchers and have broader benefits to scientists and society. The aim of the study was to assess the perceptions, experiences, and training needs relative to science communication and research translation of project investigators associated with the Center for Oceans and Human Health and Climate Change Interactions at the University of South Carolina. In-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted with the Center's investigators. Interview transcripts were coded and analyzed for emergent themes related to science communication and research translation. Investigator descriptions of their research varied in length, and researchers mentioned multiple target audiences. Most investigators preferred in-person and written communication channels and felt "comfortable" communicating uncertain findings to the public despite no formal science communication training. Investigators suggested training focused on plain language development for target communities, assessment of audience needs, and formatting research findings for various groups. Working with multiple target audiences that have preferred communication channels necessitates a comprehensive approach to science communication training to enhance two-way communication between scientists and stakeholders.
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.