Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35384492›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental monitoring and assessment2022

Surveys of community garden affiliates and soils in Houston, Texas.

Katie R Kirsch, Thomas J McDonald, Galen D Newman, Xiaohui Xu, Jennifer A Horney

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental monitoring and assessment, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Katie R KirschProgram in Epidemiology, University of Delaware, 100 Discovery Blvd, Room 731, Newark, DE, 19713, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8041-6975
Thomas J McDonaldDepartment of Environmental and Occupational Health, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0057-0997
Galen D NewmanDepartment of Landscape Architecture and Urban Planning, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4277-5931
Xiaohui XuDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7269-4089
Jennifer A HorneyProgram in Epidemiology, University of Delaware, 100 Discovery Blvd, Room 731, Newark, DE, 19713, USA. horney@udel.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3060-0894

Funding

Single cell, multi-parametric high throughput platform to classify endocrine disruptor potential of mixturesP42ES027704 · NIEHS · TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY · PI Thomas Joseph McDonald · 2017 to 2026
$21.2M
Texas A&M Center for Environmental Health Research (TiCER)P30ES029067 · NIEHS · TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY · PI Weston W Porter · 2019 to 2026
$13.0M
NIEHS NIH HHS P30 ES029067NIEHS NIH HHS P42 ES027704
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although urban community food gardens have the capacity to strengthen and support neighborhoods in need, the benefits of such operations must be considered in tandem with the potential risks associated with urban environmental contamination. Therefore, research is needed to characterize existing community gardens in urban areas. In the present study, a survey of Houston, TX, community gardeners (N = 20) was conducted to better understand their risk-based knowledge and perceptions, current gardening practices, and willingness to implement risk mitigation measures. Soil samples collected from the beds (N = 22) and surrounding grounds (N = 24) of existing community garden sites in Houston, TX, were screened for trace and heavy metals using X-ray fluorescence spectrometry. The survey indicated that community gardeners had few concerns with regard to potential soilborne hazards and were generally willing to use diverse strategies to reduce potential hazards related to garden soil contamination. Ground and garden bed soil collected from community gardens were found to have excess concentrations of arsenic compared to federal health screening limits. The information provided here provides insight into possible discordance between community gardening risk perception and contamination risk that could be addressed through outreach, engagement, and remediation approaches.

Indexed as

GardensSoil PollutantsEnvironmental MonitoringGardeningSoilTexasSoilSoil PollutantsGardenSoil screeningSurveyUrban agriculture

Identifiers

PMID35384492
PMCPMC9337712

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.