Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38026430›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2023

Engaging interested parties to optimize wildfire smoke communication in Canada: challenges with initiating change.

Amelia Choy, Erin M Shellington, Karen Rideout, Meghan Roushorne, Phalgun Joshi, Christopher Carlsten

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Wildfire and Smoke Risk Communication: A Systematic Literature Review from a Health Equity Focus.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. 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

6 authors.

Amelia ChoyLegacy for Airway Health, Center for Lung Health, Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Erin M ShellingtonLegacy for Airway Health, Center for Lung Health, Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Karen RideoutLegacy for Airway Health, Center for Lung Health, Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Meghan RoushorneEnvironmental Health Program British Columbia, Health Canada, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Phalgun JoshiLegacy for Airway Health, Center for Lung Health, Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Christopher CarlstenLegacy for Airway Health, Center for Lung Health, Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, Vancouver, BC, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: In February 2022, an online Wildfire Smoke Communication Workshop series identified priorities and strategies to improve wildfire smoke communication in Canada. We evaluated the engagement methods, the workshop series and workshop summary report, to determine if participants/organizations initiated changes identified in the workshop to optimize wildfire smoke communication plans. Methods: Three evaluation surveys were developed using the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance) framework dimensions and PRISM (Practical, Robust, Implementation, and Sustainability Model) contextual domains to measure the engagement impact. Surveys 1, 2, and 3 were disseminated to workshop participants between February 2022 (post-workshop series), May 2022 (pre-wildfire season), and September 2022 (post-wildfire season). Likert survey responses were analyzed descriptively using means and standard deviations. Open-ended written responses were analyzed using deductive reasoning and response proportions. Results: Of 69 workshop participants, 28, 19, and 13 responded to surveys 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Workshop participation helped survey 1 respondents consider optimizing wildfire smoke communication (M = 3.93, SD = 0.88). Workshop participation and the summary report helped survey 2 respondents consider new actions to optimize wildfire smoke communication (M = 3.84, SD = 0.74). The most Conclusion: The engagement methods, particularly the summary report, were beneficial for organizations to take action to optimize wildfire smoke communication in Canada. Future engagement methods should examine persisting system-level issues and capacity limitations as they undermin

Indexed as

SmokeWildfiresCanadaCommunicationEnvironmental ExposureHumansSmokecommunicationevaluation studies as topicpublic healthwildfireswork engagement

Identifiers

PMID38026430
PMCPMC10652752

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.