ArticleScientific reports2025
Essential health risk communication for recovery after lifting evacuation orders following the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant accident.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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.
- Radiation cognition, government trust and their potential influencing factors in residents within 30 km of Qinshan nuclear power plant.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant, managed by the Tokyo Electric Power Company experienced a catastrophic accident in 2011 that led to widespread public anxiety regarding radiation exposure and the long-term impacts of evacuation. The recovery process has considerably varied across the affected municipalities, highlighting the need for effective and targeted risk communication to support residents in understanding these situations and making informed decisions. This study aims to examine the health risk communication strategies implemented by health and medical welfare experts in response to the lifting of evacuation orders in formerly evacuated areas. We provide an overview of the practical activities carried out by these experts, with a particular focus on the contributions of Fukushima Medical University, Hirosaki University, and Nagasaki University. Over the years, these institutions have played a key role in radiation protection and public health initiatives, guided by scientific and technical perspectives. Our findings underscore the necessity of evolving two-way communication practices that are responsive to specific needs of the recovery phase. Additionally, this study highlights the importance of integrating comprehensive health promotion activities with radiation health risk communication to ensure sustained attention to both physical and mental health. Furthermore, expert communication efforts remain essential in supporting social care professionals who are involved in the ongoing care of residents. Finally, the global sharing of Fukushima's recovery strategies is essential for providing insights that can inform future disaster preparedness efforts.
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.