IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v16y2019i21p4183-d281436.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Mixed Methods Evaluation of Sharing Air Pollution Results with Study Participants via Report-Back Communication

Author

Listed:
  • Kathryn S. Tomsho

    (Department of Environmental Health, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115, USA)

  • Claire Schollaert

    (Department of Environmental Health, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02118, USA)

  • Temana Aguilar

    (Department of Environmental Health, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02118, USA)

  • Roseann Bongiovanni

    (GreenRoots, Inc., 227 Marginal St., Suite 1, Chelsea, MA 02150, USA)

  • Marty Alvarez

    (Department of Environmental Health, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115, USA)

  • Madeleine K. Scammell

    (Department of Environmental Health, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02118, USA
    Scammell and Adamkiewicz share senior authorship.)

  • Gary Adamkiewicz

    (Department of Environmental Health, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115, USA
    Scammell and Adamkiewicz share senior authorship.)

Abstract

We implemented a concurrent triangulation mixed-methods evaluation of an air pollution data report-back to study participants in Chelsea, Massachusetts. We aimed to determine whether the report-back was effective in the following three ways: engagement, understandability, and actionability for the participants. We also evaluated participants’ valuation of the report-back information and process. The evaluation involved both qualitative components, such as ethnographic observation, and quantitative components, such as closed-ended questionnaires and demographic data. The participants who engaged in the report-back process were significantly different from those who did not engage both in terms of their demographics, and in their indoor air pollutant concentrations. Participant understanding generally corresponded with the intended meaning of the research team, suggesting successful data communication. Additionally, many of the participants reported that they were inspired to take action in order to reduce their indoor air pollutant exposure as a result of the report-back process and information provided. These results identify areas of improvement for engagement, particularly regarding populations that may have higher exposures. This work outlines a framework with which to contextualize and evaluate the success of engagement with report-back efforts. Such evaluations can allow research teams to assess whether they are providing information that is equitably useful and actionable for all participants.

Suggested Citation

  • Kathryn S. Tomsho & Claire Schollaert & Temana Aguilar & Roseann Bongiovanni & Marty Alvarez & Madeleine K. Scammell & Gary Adamkiewicz, 2019. "A Mixed Methods Evaluation of Sharing Air Pollution Results with Study Participants via Report-Back Communication," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(21), pages 1-14, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:16:y:2019:i:21:p:4183-:d:281436
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/21/4183/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/21/4183/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Monica D. Ramirez-Andreotta & Julia Green Brody & Nathan Lothrop & Miranda Loh & Paloma I. Beamer & Phil Brown, 2016. "Improving Environmental Health Literacy and Justice through Environmental Exposure Results Communication," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-27, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Erin Polka & Ellen Childs & Alexa Friedman & Kathryn S. Tomsho & Birgit Claus Henn & Madeleine K. Scammell & Chad W. Milando, 2021. "MCR: Open-Source Software to Automate Compilation of Health Study Report-Back," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(11), pages 1-12, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Diana Rohlman & Jamie Donatuto & Myk Heidt & Michael Barton & Larry Campbell & Kim A. Anderson & Molly L. Kile, 2019. "A Case Study Describing a Community-Engaged Approach for Evaluating Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon Exposure in a Native American Community," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-18, January.
    2. Marialuisa Menegatto & Adriano Zamperini, 2023. "Health and Psychological Concerns of Communities Affected by Per- and Poly-Fluoroalkyl Substances: The Case of Residents Living in the Orange Area of the Veneto Region," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(22), pages 1-20, November.
    3. Jayajit Chakraborty & Timothy W. Collins & Sara E. Grineski, 2016. "Environmental Justice Research: Contemporary Issues and Emerging Topics," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-5, November.
    4. Erin Lebow-Skelley & Sarah Yelton & Brandi Janssen & Esther Erdei & Melanie A. Pearson, 2020. "Identifying Issues and Priorities in Reporting Back Environmental Health Data," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(18), pages 1-19, September.
    5. Arthur Moses & Jean E. T. McLain & Aminata Kilungo & Robert A. Root & Leif Abrell & Sanlyn Buxner & Flor Sandoval & Theresa Foley & Miriam Jones & Mónica D. Ramírez-Andreotta, 2022. "Minding the gap: socio-demographic factors linked to the perception of environmental pollution, water harvesting infrastructure, and gardening characteristics," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 12(3), pages 594-610, September.
    6. Andrew R. Binder & Katlyn May & John Murphy & Anna Gross & Elise Carlsten, 2022. "Environmental Health Literacy as Knowing, Feeling, and Believing: Analyzing Linkages between Race, Ethnicity, and Socioeconomic Status and Willingness to Engage in Protective Behaviors against Health ," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(5), pages 1-17, February.
    7. Julie Von Behren & Michelle Wong & Daniela Morales & Peggy Reynolds & Paul B. English & Gina Solomon, 2022. "Returning Individual Tap Water Testing Results to Research Study Participants after a Wildfire Disaster," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(2), pages 1-13, January.
    8. Marti Lindsey & Shaw-Ree Chen & Richmond Ben & Melissa Manoogian & Jordan Spradlin, 2021. "Defining Environmental Health Literacy," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-15, November.
    9. Courtney M. Cooper & Jeff B. Langman & Dilshani Sarathchandra & Chantal A. Vella & Chloe B. Wardropper, 2020. "Perceived Risk and Intentions to Practice Health Protective Behaviors in a Mining-Impacted Region," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-18, October.
    10. Kathleen M. Gray, 2018. "From Content Knowledge to Community Change: A Review of Representations of Environmental Health Literacy," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-17, March.
    11. Kathryn S. Tomsho & Erin Polka & Stacey Chacker & David Queeley & Marty Alvarez & Madeleine K. Scammell & Karen M. Emmons & Rima E. Rudd & Gary Adamkiewicz, 2022. "Characterizing the Environmental Health Literacy and Sensemaking of Indoor Air Quality of Research Participants," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(4), pages 1-16, February.
    12. Dorsey B. Kaufmann & Kunal Palawat & Shana Sandhaus & Sanlyn Buxner & Ellen McMahon & Mónica D. Ramírez-Andreotta, 2023. "Communicating environmental data through art: the role of emotion and memory in evoking environmental action," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-14, December.
    13. Leona F. Davis & Mónica D. Ramirez-Andreotta & Jean E. T. McLain & Aminata Kilungo & Leif Abrell & Sanlyn Buxner, 2018. "Increasing Environmental Health Literacy through Contextual Learning in Communities at Risk," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-23, October.
    14. Diana Rohlman & Molly L. Kile & Veronica L. Irvin, 2022. "Developing a Short Assessment of Environmental Health Literacy (SA-EHL)," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(4), pages 1-15, February.
    15. Jose Ramon Saura & Pedro Palos-Sanchez & Miguel Angel Rios Martin, 2018. "Attitudes Expressed in Online Comments about Environmental Factors in the Tourism Sector: An Exploratory Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-20, March.
    16. Erin Polka & Ellen Childs & Alexa Friedman & Kathryn S. Tomsho & Birgit Claus Henn & Madeleine K. Scammell & Chad W. Milando, 2021. "MCR: Open-Source Software to Automate Compilation of Health Study Report-Back," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(11), pages 1-12, June.
    17. Daniel Madrigal & Mariana Claustro & Michelle Wong & Esther Bejarano & Luis Olmedo & Paul English, 2020. "Developing Youth Environmental Health Literacy and Civic Leadership through Community Air Monitoring in Imperial County, California," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(5), pages 1-12, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:16:y:2019:i:21:p:4183-:d:281436. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.