Reporting individual results for biomonitoring and environmental exposures: lessons learned from environmental communication case studies

被引:77
作者
Brody, Julia Green [1 ]
Dunagan, Sarah C. [1 ]
Morello-Frosch, Rachel [2 ,3 ]
Brown, Phil [4 ,5 ]
Patton, Sharyle [6 ]
Rudel, Ruthann A. [1 ]
机构
[1] Silent Spring Inst, Newton, MA 02458 USA
[2] Univ Calif Berkeley, Sch Publ Hlth, Berkeley, CA 94720 USA
[3] Univ Calif Berkeley, Dept Environm Sci Policy & Management, Berkeley, CA 94720 USA
[4] Northeastern Univ, Dept Sociol & Anthropol, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[5] Northeastern Univ, Dept Hlth Sci, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[6] Commonweal, Bolinas, CA USA
关键词
Bioethics; Biomonitoring; Community-based participatory research; Exposure assessment; Health literacy; Informed consent; Research ethics; Risk communication; EXPERIENCE; AIR;
D O I
10.1186/1476-069X-13-40
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Measurement methods for chemicals in biological and personal environmental samples have expanded rapidly and become a cornerstone of health studies and public health surveillance. These measurements raise questions about whether and how to report individual results to study participants, particularly when health effects and exposure reduction strategies are uncertain. In an era of greater public participation and open disclosure in science, researchers and institutional review boards (IRBs) need new guidance on changing norms and best practices. Drawing on the experiences of researchers, IRBs, and study participants, we discuss ethical frameworks, effective methods, and outcomes in studies that have reported personal results for a wide range of environmental chemicals. Belmont Report principles and community-based participatory research ethics imply responsibilities to report individual results, and several recent biomonitoring guidance documents call for individual reports. Meaningful report-back includes contextual information about health implications and exposure reduction strategies. Both narrative and graphs are helpful. Graphs comparing an individual's results with other participants in the study and benchmarks, such as the National Exposure Report, are helpful, but must be used carefully to avoid incorrect inferences that higher results are necessarily harmful or lower results are safe. Methods can be tailored for specific settings by involving participants and community members in planning. Participants and researchers who have participated in report-back identified benefits: increasing trust in science, retention in cohort studies, environmental health literacy, individual and community empowerment, and motivation to reduce exposures. Researchers as well as participants gained unexpected insights into the characteristics and sources of environmental contamination. Participants are almost universally eager to receive their results and do not regret getting them. Ethical considerations and empirical experience both support study participants' right to know their own results if they choose, so report-back should become the norm in studies that measure personal exposures. Recent studies provide models that are compiled in a handbook to help research partnerships that are planning report-back. Thoughtful report-back can strengthen research experiences for investigators and participants and expand the translation of environmental health research in communities.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 26 条
[1]   Disentangling the Exposure Experience: The Roles of Community Context and Report-Back of Environmental Exposure Data [J].
Adams, Crystal ;
Brown, Phil ;
Morello-Frosch, Rachel ;
Brody, Julia Green ;
Rudel, Ruthann ;
Zota, Ami ;
Dunagan, Sarah ;
Tovar, Jessica ;
Patton, Sharyle .
JOURNAL OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL BEHAVIOR, 2011, 52 (02) :180-196
[2]   Pollution Comes Home and Gets Personal: Women's Experience of Household Chemical Exposure [J].
Altman, Rebecca Gasior ;
Morello-Frosch, Rachel ;
Brody, Julia Green ;
Rudel, Ruthann ;
Brown, Phil ;
Averick, Mara .
JOURNAL OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL BEHAVIOR, 2008, 49 (04) :417-435
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2013, Breast Cancer and the Environment: Prioritizing Prevention
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2003, COMMUNITY BASED PART
[5]  
Barlow J, COMMUNICATING INDIVI
[6]   A systematic approach for designing a HBM Pilot Study for Europe [J].
Becker, Kerstin ;
Seiwert, Margarete ;
Casteleyn, Ludwine ;
Joas, Reinhard ;
Joas, Anke ;
Biot, Pierre ;
Aerts, Dominique ;
Castano, Argelia ;
Esteban, Marta ;
Angerer, Juergen ;
Koch, Holger M. ;
Schoeters, Greet ;
Den Hond, Elly ;
Sepai, Ovnair ;
Exley, Karen ;
Knudsen, Lisbeth E. ;
Horvat, Milena ;
Bloemen, Louis ;
Kolossa-Gehring, Marike .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYGIENE AND ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH, 2014, 217 (2-3) :312-322
[7]   Is it safe?: New ethics for reporting personal exposures to environmental chemicals [J].
Brody, Julia Green ;
Morello-Frosch, Rachel ;
Brown, Phil ;
Rudel, Ruthann A. ;
Altman, Rebecca Gasior ;
Frye, Margaret ;
Osimo, Cheryl A. ;
Perez, Carla ;
Seryalk, Liesel M. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, 2007, 97 (09) :1547-1554
[8]   Institutional review board challenges related to community-based participatory research on human exposure to environmental toxins: A case study [J].
Brown, Phil ;
Morello-Frosch, Rachel ;
Brody, J. G. ;
Altman, Rebecca Gasior ;
Rudel, Ruthann A. ;
Senier, Laura ;
Perez, Carla ;
Simpson, Ruth .
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH, 2010, 9
[9]  
Day Brent, 2007, Health Rep, V18 Suppl, P37
[10]   Inviting Patients to Read Their Doctors' Notes: A Quasi-experimental Study and a Look Ahead [J].
Delbanco, Tom ;
Walker, Jan ;
Bell, Sigall K. ;
Darer, Jonathan D. ;
Elmore, Joann G. ;
Farag, Nadine ;
Feldman, Henry J. ;
Mejilla, Roanne ;
Ngo, Long ;
Ralston, James D. ;
Ross, Stephen E. ;
Trivedi, Neha ;
Vodicka, Elisabeth ;
Leveille, Suzanne G. .
ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2012, 157 (07) :461-U36