ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2026
Fragrance-Free Policies: A Scoping Review of Definitions, Implementation, and Gaps.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 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.
- Fragrance-Free Policies in Practice: Identifying Perceived Implementation Gaps Through Lived Experience in a Qualitative-Dominant Mixed-Methods 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFragrance-free policies are increasingly adopted to improve indoor air quality and reduce fragrance exposure linked to adverse health outcomes and accessibility barriers. This scoping review mapped the evidence on fragrance-free policies across sectors.
methodsFollowing Arksey and O'Malley's framework and PRISMA-ScR guidelines, we searched five peer-reviewed databases and grey literature sources. Documents describing formal scent-free or fragrance-free policies or guidance in workplaces, healthcare, educational, or public settings were included. Data were charted on policy characteristics, enforcement mechanisms, implementation supports, and governance features.
resultsSixty-three documents were included. Findings revealed substantial variability in terminology, scope, and enforcement. Many policies relied on voluntary compliance and awareness-based strategies, with limited integration of structural supports such as procurement controls, staff training, and evaluation frameworks. Enforcement mechanisms were predominantly reactive, responsibilities were inconsistently defined, and consequences for non-compliance were limited. Although many policies referenced multiple chemical sensitivity or fragrance sensitivity, accommodation pathways and accountability structures were frequently lacking. Four key themes indicate that many fragrance-free policies function as accommodation tools rather than integrated environmental health interventions.
conclusionsStrengthening definitional clarity, institutional accountability, and structural integration may enhance effectiveness and support more consistent, equitable, and evidence-informed approaches to reducing fragrance-related exposures in indoor environments.
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.