ArticleJournal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology2026
Comparative Analysis of Report-back of Research Results Strategies for Personal Chemical Exposure Data.
Article in Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology, 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundReport-back of research results (RBRR) is ethically supported and highly requested by participants, yet lacks broadly transferable guidelines for RBRR. Effective RBRR must be responsive to target audience needs and may not be addressed by a 'one-size-fits-all' approach.
objectiveWithin a subset of our 19 studies on RBRR, we had the unique opportunity to carry out a comparative analysis of RBRR strategies across cohorts with similar development and evaluation methods, yet distinct in life stage, geography, number and type of chemicals assessed, and community contexts.
methodsWe highlight key outcomes from three environmental health studies: an ongoing New York, NY cohort (Fair Start; n = 486) and a Detroit, MI cohort (CLEAR; n = 34) assessing exposure to ambient urban pollution during pregnancy, and a longitudinal cohort in Houston, TX (Houston-3H; n = 312) following Hurricane Harvey. Focus group and survey data were analyzed to identify lessons learned and explore how RBRR supports understanding of environmental health.
resultsCommonalities emerged in RBRR development, design, organization, and data visualization, as well as in how RBRR can contribute to an understanding of health-environment connections. Differences included preferences for individual versus community level findings, as well as distinguishable contextual considerations. For pregnancy cohorts, messaging was framed with cultural sensitivity, and to avoid unintended consequences of parental guilt due to prenatal exposures. In the post-disaster Houston-3H study, participants requested additional transparency regarding sampling design and study rationale. SIGNIFICANCE: All RBRR case studies reported chemicals without known regulatory or health guidelines, so results were contextualized within the study population. Participants across cohorts requested multi-study comparisons to better understand their results beyond their communities. While foundational RBRR elements (e.g. plain language, graphic organizers) may supersede cohort-specific differences, RBRR should be personalized to encompass perceptions of health across different life-stage, cultural, and environmental contexts. IMPACT: We had the unique opportunity to compare different studies, accounting for different exposure experiences, life stages, chemicals assessed, and RBRR evaluation methods. To our knowledge, this is the first multi-state study reporting back wristband data, used to assess transferable strategies across populations, and how RBRR supports participant understanding of environmental influences on health. Due to the differences between disaster-impacted and peripartum individuals in this subset of case studies, comparisons can inform transferable characteristics of developing RBRR as well as study specific attributes that are responsive to unique contexts.
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.