ArticleEnvironmental research, health : ERH2026
Coalition building and citizen science for radon risk reduction.
Article in Environmental research, health : ERH, 2026. 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.
- Examining Community Engagement Strategies Used in the Climate Impact on Lung Cancer via Exposure to Radon (CLOVER) Study.International journal of environmental research and 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We evaluated the implementation of local coalitions led in partnership with citizen scientists, community-based organizations, and public libraries in four rural communities to lower exposure to radon in the home. The objectives were to (1) describe the Reach-Effectiveness-Adoption-Implementation-Maintenance (RE-AIM) of four radon coalitions, and (2) compare RE-AIM factors among citizen scientists who participated in the coalitions and those who did not. A larger community-engaged research project embedded coalition building using a citizen science approach. Three of the four coalitions focused on health and wellness more broadly (18-34 members); one focused solely on radon (10 members). Coalition membership and activities varied from marketing a radon detector Library Loan Program, community events, and in-library tabling events to working with government officials to sign National Radon Action Month proclamations. We used mixed methods to evaluate coalition-building using the RE-AIM framework. The coalitions were most likely to reach local health departments, hospitals, and schools. Although these partners were highly supportive, they provided few to no resources. Four in 10 citizen scientists were at least moderately involved in the coalition regardless of whether they had high home radon. Citizen scientists reported low awareness of both how frequently radon received local media attention and how favorably radon awareness, testing, and mitigation was portrayed in local media, particularly among those uninvolved in the coalition. Citizen scientists involved in the coalition had the most experience disseminating scientific information on radon and educating the public. The coalitions fostered radon mitigation as 82% of library loan participants with high radon were likely to hire a radon mitigation professional, and all said financial assistance would help them mitigate. Multi-issue health coalitions that engage citizen scientists and partner with public libraries can increase radon testing and build demand for mitigation in rural areas.
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.