@article {691627,
	title = {A process for creating data report-back tools to improve equity in environmental health},
	journal = {Environmental Health},
	volume = {21},
	number = {67},
	year = {2022},
	pages = {1-12},
	abstract = {Background: Although there is increasing interest in reporting results of environmental research efforts back to participants, evidence-based tools have not yet been applied to developed materials to ensure their accessibility in terms of literacy, numeracy, and data visualization demand. Additionally, there is not yet guidance as to how to formally assess the created materials to assure a match with the intended audience. Methods: Relying on formative qualitative research with participants of an indoor air quality study in Dorchester, Massachusetts, we identified means of enhancing accessibility of indoor air quality data report-back materials for participants. Participants (n = 20) engaged in semi-structured interviews in which they described challenges they encountered with scientific and medical materials and outlined written and verbal communication techniques that would help facilitate engagement with and accessibility of environmental health report-back materials. We coupled these insights from participants with best practice guidelines for written materials by operationalizing health literacy tools to produce accessible audience-informed data report-back materials. Results: The resulting data report-back materials had a 7th -grade reading level, and between a 4th -8th grade level of overall document complexity. The numeracy skills required to engage with the material were of the lowest demand, and we incorporated best practices for risk communication and facilitating understanding and actionability of the materials. Use of a rigorous assessment tool provides evidence of accessibility and appropriateness of the material for the audience. Conclusions: We outline a process for developing and evaluating environmental health data reports that are tailored to inspire risk-reduction actions, and are demonstrably accessible in terms of their literacy, numeracy, and data visualization demand. Adapting health literacy tools to create and evaluate environmental data report-back materials is a novel and evidence-based means of ensuring their accessibility.},
	url = {https://link.springer.com/epdf/10.1186/s12940-022-00880-w?sharing_token=332h-p9ZetY_j9W5NzEUr2_BpE1tBhCbnbw3BuzI2RMzmxrm3C3afU-2Da05z2r39ZBJaG2Wfq1X8dT4uprA2Ct7PXTbw2dMrXtVplx8SRIz5vX0XzrR_8GND90t7cY2LLc_ZyzEpOGuPnAHnVf9aSzf-LtLZzAPtKz8-fgUpjY\%3D},
	author = {Tomsho, Kathryn S. and Erin Polka and Stacey Chacker and David Queeley and Alvarez, Marty and Madeleine Scammell and Karen M. Emmons and Rima E. Rudd and Gary Adamkiewicz}
}
@article {687294,
	title = {Characterizing the Environmental Health Literacy and Sensemaking of Indoor Air Quality of Research Participants},
	journal = {International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health},
	volume = {19},
	number = {2227},
	year = {2022},
	abstract = {This study is based on in-depth semi-structured interviews with the participants of an indoor air quality monitoring study. The purpose of the interviews was to capture participants{\textquoteright} perceptions of indoor air quality and engage them in a discussion of those factors that influenced their behavior. Interview study participants (n\&nbsp;= 20) noted the importance of family health concerns and their own sensory awareness of possible contaminants. They discussed their level of personal control over their home environment as well as their access to needed resources. This study is based on grounded theory and applies interpretivist epistemological methods. Study findings offer insights into how people perceive their home environment and what influences their decision making and action. Analyses indicate that perceived agency, risk perception, access to resources, and information all influenced participants{\textquoteright} sense of ability to take action as well as their interest in taking action. These insights serve to challenge some of the current work in environmental health literacy which tends to focus on and measure an individual{\textquoteright}s knowledge or skills. Our analysis suggests that consideration be given to a number of factors that include perceived agency, access to resources, and the quality of information provided.},
	url = {https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/4/2227},
	author = {Tomsho, Kathryn S. and Erin Polka and Stacey Chacker and David Queeley and Alvarez, Marty and Scammell, Madeleine K. and Karen M. Emmons and Rima E. Rudd and Gary Adamkiewicz}
}
@article {672804,
	title = {MCR: Open-Source Software to Automate Compilation of Health Study Report-Back},
	journal = {International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health},
	volume = {18},
	number = {6104},
	year = {2021},
	month = {5 June, 2021},
	pages = {1-12},
	abstract = {Sharing individualized results with health study participants, a practice we and others refer to as {\textquotedblleft}report-back,{\textquotedblright} ensures participant access to exposure and health information and may promote health equity. However, the practice of report-back and the content shared is often limited by the time-intensive process of personalizing reports. Software tools that automate creation of individualized reports have been built for specific studies, but are largely not open-source or broadly modifiable. We created an open-source and generalizable tool, called the Macro for the Compilation of Report-backs (MCR), to automate compilation of health study reports. We piloted MCR in two environmental exposure studies in Massachusetts, USA, and interviewed research team members (n = 7) about the impact of MCR on the report-back process. Researchers using MCR created more detailed reports than during manual report-back, including more individualized numerical, text, and graphical results. Using MCR, researchers saved time producing draft and final reports. Researchers also reported feeling more creative in the design process and more confident in report-back quality control. While MCR does not expedite the entire report-back process, we hope that this open-source tool reduces the barriers to personalizing health study reports, promotes more equitable access to individualized data, and advances self-determination among participants},
	url = {https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/11/6104/htm},
	author = {Erin Polka and Ellen Childs and Alexa Friedman and Tomsho, Kathryn S. and Birgit Claus Henn and Scammell, Madeleine K. and Chad W. Milando}
}
@article {666640,
	title = {Reporting Results of a Community-based In-home Exposure Monitoring Study: Developing Methods and Materials},
	journal = {Progress in Community Health Partnerships: Research, Education, and Action},
	year = {2021},
	month = {Feb. 2021},
	pages = {117-125},
	url = {https://www.muse.jhu.edu/article/785625},
	author = {Schollaert, C. and Alvarez, M. and Tomsho, K.S. and Bongiovanni, R. and Chacker, S. and Aguilar, T. and Vallarino, J. and Adamkiewicz, G. and Scammell, M.K.}
}
@article {646421,
	title = {Human Health Risks Due to Airborne Polychlorinated Biphenyls Are Highest in New Bedford Harbor Communities Living Closest to the Harbor},
	journal = {Science of the Total Environment},
	year = {2019},
	url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2016.04.081},
	author = {Heiger-Bernays, Wendy J. and Tomsho, Kathryn S. and Basra, Komal and Petropolous, Zoe E. and Crawfor, Kate and Hornbuckle, Keri C. and Scammell, Madeleine K.}
}
@article {646422,
	title = {A Mixed Methods Evaluation of Sharing Air Pollution Results with Study Participants via Report-Back Communication},
	journal = {International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health},
	volume = {16},
	year = {2019},
	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{\textquoteright} 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.},
	url = {https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/21/4183},
	author = {Tomsho, Kathryn S. and Schollaert, Claire and Aguilar, Temana and Bongiovanni, Roseann and Alvarez, Marty and Scammell, Madeleine K. and Gary Adamkiewicz}
}
@article {646423,
	title = {Community Reporting of Ambient Air Polychlorinated Biphenyl Concentrations Near a Superfund Site},
	journal = {Environmental Science Pollution Research},
	volume = {25},
	year = {2017},
	abstract = {In this manuscript, we describe the process of establishing partnerships for community-based environmental exposure research, the tools and methods implemented for data report-back to community members, and the results of evaluations of these efforts. Data discovery and report-back materials developed by Statistics for Action (SFA) were employed as the framework to communicate the environmental data to community members and workshops. These data communication and research translation efforts are described in detail and evaluated for effectiveness based on feedback provided from community members who attended the workshops. Overall, the methods were mostly effective for the intended data communication.},
	url = {https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11356-017-0286-6},
	author = {Tomsho, Kathryn S. and Basra, Komal and Rubin, Staci M. and Miller, Claire B. and Juang, Richard and Broude, Sylvia and Martinez, Andre and Hornbuckle, Keri C. and Heiger-Bernays, Wendy and Scammell, Madeleine K.}
}
@article {646424,
	title = {Release of Airborne Polychlorinated Biphenyls from New Bedford Harbor Results in Elevated Concentrations in the Surrounding Air},
	journal = {Environmental Science and Technology},
	volume = {4},
	year = {2017},
	pages = {127-131},
	abstract = {Qualitatively and quantitatively, we have demonstrated that airborne polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) concentrations in the air surrounding New Bedford Harbor (NBH) are caused by its water PCB emissions. We measured airborne PCBs at 18 homes and businesses near NBH in 2015, with values ranging from 0.4 to 38 ng m{\textendash}3, with a very strong Aroclor 1242/1016 signal that is most pronounced closest to the harbor and reproducible over three sampling rounds. Using U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) water PCB data from 2015 and local meteorology, we predicted gas-phase fluxes of PCBs from 160 to 1200 μg m{\textendash}2\&nbsp;day{\textendash}1. Fluxes were used as emissions for AERMOD, a widely applied U.S. EPA atmospheric dispersion model, to predict airborne PCB concentrations. The AERMOD predictions were within a factor of 2 of the field measurements. PCB emission from NBH (110 kg year{\textendash}1, average 2015) is the largest reported source of airborne PCBs from natural waters in North America, and the source of high ambient air PCB concentrations in locations close to NBH. It is likely that NBH has been an important source of airborne PCBs since it was contaminated with Aroclors more than 60 years ago.},
	author = {Martinez, Andres and Hadnott, Bailey N. and Awad, Andrew M. and Herkert, Nicholas J. and Tomsho, Kathryn S. and Basra, Komal and Scammell, Madeleine K. and Heiger-Bernays, Wendy and Hornbuckle, Keri C.}
}
