ArticleBMC public health2020
A mixed-methods community-based participatory research to explore stakeholder's perspectives and to quantify the effect of crop residue burning on air and human health in Central India: study protocol.
Article in BMC public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Rapid Reduction of Phytotoxicity in Green Waste for Use as Peat Substitute: Optimization of Ammonium Incubation Process.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCrop residue burning adversely affects air quality and consequently human health. India, being one of the largest agro-economies of the world, produces around 500 Million tonnes of crop residue annually most of which is burnt on-farm. However, integrated studies that simultaneously quantify the effects of crop residue burning while exploring the subjective determinants of the practice are lacking in India. This paper describes the protocol for a longitudinal mixed methods research study employing a community-based participatory approach to fill this gap.
methodsBoth quantitative and qualitative data will be collected in a rural setting of the central Indian province of Madhya Pradesh, over 1 year. A steering committee comprising of the research team and community representatives will be formed. The proportion of cultivable land burnt in one crop burning season will be estimated. The association between crop residue burning, level of ambient air pollutants, and pulmonary function of village residents will be determined. Focus groups, interviews, and participatory rural appraisal methods will be used to explore stakeholder perspectives about crop residue burning. Potential barriers and opportunities for substituting burning with an alternative crop residue management technique will be ascertained as the basis for future interventions. Ethics approval has been obtained from the Institutional Ethics Committee of the National Institute for Research in Environmental Health (No: NIREH/BPL/IEC/2019-20/1494, dt 06/01/2020). DISCUSSION: This manuscript describes the protocol for a novel community-based participatory study to investigate thoroughly the phenomenon of crop residue burning from the perspective of the agricultural community through their active collaboration. The lack of comprehensive evidence regarding the factors responsible for crop residue burning in India underlines the importance of implementing this study protocol to fill in this critical gap in knowledge. While acknowledging that findings of this study will be not generalizable to agricultural communities other than the one studied, it is expected that the study will generate baseline evidence that might be beneficial in developing and implementing an appropriate intervention strategy.
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.