ArticleBMC public health2025
What do people need to know about endocrine disrupting chemicals and health? A mental models approach using focus groups of community-engaged research teams and a national survey.
Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEndocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs), which interfere with the body's natural hormones, are ubiquitous in everyday environments and consumer products. Nearly everyone is routinely exposed, and growing evidence links them to adverse health outcomes including cancers, impaired fertility, metabolic disorders, and neurodevelopmental effects. Major medical and scientific groups recommend exposure reduction. To make informed decisions about individual- and societal-level exposures to EDCs, people need relevant knowledge. Knowledge is one component of environmental health literacy, a multidimensional concept supporting readiness to protect health from environmental risks. This study sought to develop expert consensus about communications targets for EDCs and to learn how public knowledge matches these targets.
methodsWe convened focus groups with community-engaged research teams (n = 38) to define targets for public understanding. We coded transcripts, mapped causal pathways influencing EDC exposures and health outcomes using a mental models approach, and identified communication priorities. We then fielded a quantitative online survey among adults living in the U.S. (n = 504) to compare their knowledge with the mental model. We computed response frequencies and used multiple regression to evaluate associations between a knowledge index and participant characteristics.
resultsFocus group participants highlighted that people need to know that EDCs affect nearly all systems in the human body and that scientific evidence supports limiting exposure. They emphasized that policy controls can be more effective than personal action at reducing exposure, and that current U.S. chemicals regulations are not protective. Survey respondents were generally aware that EDCs can affect fertility, cancer, and child brain development (84-90%, n = 426-452), and they had some understanding of exposure pathways (58-86%, n = 295-435). However, most participants had large knowledge gaps about U.S. chemicals regulation and wrongly believed that chemicals must be safety-tested before being used in products (82%, n = 414), that product ingredients must be disclosed (73%, n = 368), and that restricted chemicals cannot be replaced by similar substitutes (63%, n = 317).
conclusionsU.S. adults typically understood that EDCs affect health. However, incomplete information about how people get exposed to EDCs and misconceptions about U.S. chemicals regulations limit appropriate actions. These knowledge gaps are targets for future communications about EDCs and harmful chemicals more broadly.
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.