ArticleDiscover social science and health2026
A community-based participatory research program to identify lead exposure risks and community priorities.
Article in Discover social science and health, 2026. 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
- Update of
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Lead is an environmental health hazard that disproportionately impacts communities of color across the United States (U.S.). Recent incidents of widespread lead exposure have been linked to aging infrastructure, historical land use, and challenges in lead remediation. Objective: To understand community-identified concerns, needs, and priorities related to lead exposure. Methods: Four focus groups with a total of 73 community members, were conducted in Norristown, Pennsylvania, U.S. from Fall 2022 to Spring 2023. Using a community-based participatory research (CBPR) framework and a semi-structured interview guide, participants were asked questions regarding their perceived exposure to lead and current exposure prevention methods. Open coding was used to conduct a thematic analysis of the transcript data. Results: Four themes were identified: (1) community reportesources of concern, including water, soil, and paint; (2) lack of information surrounding lead, particularly in Spanish; (3) systemic neglect, from workplaces, healthcare systems, and landlords; and (4) financial implications, from high costs and fear of displacement. Participants expressed a desire for lead testing of household water, paint, and soil, as well as personal blood lead level screening. Conclusions & implications: : There was broad community support for a lead exposure risk assessment that investigated soil, tap water, and paint sources of lead, as well as the prevalence of elevated blood lead levels in adults and children. The study also highlighted the lack of information about lead exposure in non-English speaking communities, the need for providing language-appropriate information, and the necessity for multiple lead exposure assessment methods. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s44155-025-00344-9.
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.