Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34560866›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2021

A community-engaged approach to understanding environmental health concerns and solutions in urban and rural communities.

Suwei Wang, Molly B Richardson, Mary B Evans, Ethel Johnson, Sheryl Threadgill-Matthews, Sheila Tyson, Katherine L White, Julia M Gohlke

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

8 authors.

Suwei WangTranslational Biology, Medicine, and Health Program, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA, 24061, USA.
Molly B RichardsonDivision of Preventive Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, 35233, USA.
Mary B EvansCenter for the Study of Community Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, 35233, USA.
Ethel JohnsonWest Central Alabama Community Health Improvement League, Camden, AL, 36726, USA.
Sheryl Threadgill-MatthewsWest Central Alabama Community Health Improvement League, Camden, AL, 36726, USA.
Sheila TysonFriends of West End, Birmingham, AL, 35228, USA.
Katherine L WhiteCenter for the Study of Community Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, 35233, USA.
Julia M GohlkeDepartment of Population Health Sciences, VA-MD College of Veterinary Medicine, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 205 Duck Pond Drive, Blacksburg, VA, 24061-0395, USA. jgohlke@vt.edu.

Funding

CITY HEALTH - CENTER FOR THE STUDY OF COMMUNITY HEALTHU48DP001915 · DP · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI MICHAEL, MAX · 2009 to 2013
$4.5M
Environmental exposures across urban and rural communities in the Deep SouthR01ES023029 · NIEHS · VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INST AND ST UNIV · PI GOHLKE, JULIA M · 2015 to 2019
$1.7M
NCCDPHP CDC HHS U48 DP001915NIEHS NIH HHS R01 ES023029
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFocus groups and workshops can be used to gain insights into the persistence of and potential solutions for environmental health priorities in underserved areas. The objective of this study was to characterize focus group and workshop outcomes of a community-academic partnership focused on addressing environmental health priorities in an urban and a rural location in Alabama between 2012 and 2019.

methodsSix focus groups were conducted in 2016 with 60 participants from the City of Birmingham (urban) and 51 participants from Wilcox County (rural), Alabama to discuss solutions for identified environmental health priorities based on previous focus group results in 2012. Recorded focus groups were transcribed and analyzed using the grounded theory approach. Four follow-up workshops that included written survey instruments were conducted to further explore identified priorities and determine whether the priorities change over time in the same urban (68 participants) and rural (72 participants) locations in 2018 and 2019.

resultsConsistent with focus groups in 2012, all six focus groups in 2016 in Birmingham identified abandoned houses as the primary environmental priority. Four groups listed attending city council meetings, contacting government agencies and reporting issues as individual-level solutions. Identified city-level solutions included city-led confiscation, tearing down and transferring of abandoned property ownership. In Wilcox County, all six groups agreed the top priority was drinking water quality, consistent with results in 2012. While the priority was different in Birmingham versus Wilcox County, the top identified reason for problem persistence was similar, namely unresponsive authorities. Additionally, individual-level solutions identified by Wilcox County focus groups were similar to Birmingham, including contacting and pressuring agencies and developing petitions and protesting to raise awareness, while local policy-level solutions identified in Wilcox County included government-led provision of grants to improve septic systems, and transparency in allocation of funds. Workshops in 2018 and 2019 further emphasized water quality as the top priority in Wilcox County, while participants in Birmingham transitioned from abandoned houses as a top priority in 2018 to drinking water quality as a new priority in 2019.

conclusionsApplying a community-engaged approach in both urban and rural locations provided better understanding of the unique opportunities and challenges for identifying potential interventions for environmental health priorities in both locations. Results can help inform future efforts to address locally defined environmental health issues and solutions.

Indexed as

Community ParticipationRural PopulationEnvironmental HealthHealth PrioritiesHumansStakeholder ParticipationCommunity-engagedEnvironmental healthFocus groupUrban-rural comparisonWorkshops

Identifiers

PMID34560866
PMCPMC8464125

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.