Diana Rohlman

Report-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. Within 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. We 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. Commonalities 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. 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. 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.

Background: A West Eugene, OR community has a history of odor complaints, anecdotally linked to a nearby wood preservative facility using creosote, a known source of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). The community also experiences elevated cancer risks. Objective: In response to concerns about industrial air pollution, Beyond Toxics (BT) and Oregon State University (OSU) initiated a community-engaged study to characterize residential PAH exposure. Methods.: Stationary passive samplers were deployed in residential and commercial areas at 17 locations in three rings around the facility: inner (0.25-mile, n = 4), middle (0.5-mile, n = 5), and outer (1 mile, n = 8), for seven days. Twelve residents also wore personal passive wristband samplers (WBs), with eight hosting both a wristband and stationary sampler. All samplers were analyzed for 64 PAHs. Daily activity logs were collected to assess co-variate exposures. Results were shared through individual and community reports and in-person meetings. Results: Thirty-eight PAHs were detected in stationary samplers. The five most abundant were naphthalene (169 ng/m³), acenaphthene (165 ng/m³), 2-methylnaphthalene (160 ng/m³), 1-methylnaphthalene (87.0 ng/m³), and fluorene (40.4 ng/m³). Seventeen PAHs were detected across the 12 wristbands, with phenanthrene, 2-methylnaphthalene, acenaphthene, fluorene, and naphthalene as the most abundant. PAHs were highest in the inner ring and northeastern area, downwind of the facility, followed by the east, near an industrial railway. Significance: The exposure patterns observed reflect community reports of odors in the northeast. The most abundant PAHs in both sampler types are associated with creosote. All wristband PAHs were also observed in stationary samplers, suggesting a common exposure source. This community-engaged study identified higher exposures near the industrial source in both ambient and personal samples- supporting long-standing community concerns. Impact statement: Residents in an environmental justice community raised concerns about air pollution from industrial sources. A community-engaged research study used passive samplers to characterize and quantify ambient and personal exposure to vapor phase polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons.

Reporting back of research results (RBRR) is becoming a recognized component of ethical community-engaged and human subjects research. Scholars emphasize the importance of involving participants in developing reports and methods of report-back, arguing that RBRR enhances comprehension, trust, and engagement with findings. Yet, despite growing recognition, standardized guidelines for ethical RBRR remain limited. To address this gap, we conducted a systematic literature review of peer-reviewed studies- primarily in genomics, environmental health, and biomonitoring- to identify RBRR development strategies. Secondarily, we assessed how these strategies may align with the bioethical principles of autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice to inform future RBRR design. A systematic search of Web of Science, PubMed, and Google Scholar yielded 2,164 records; after removing 748 duplicates, 1,416 unique studies were screened, and 32 met the inclusion criteria (peer-reviewed, published 2016–2024, written in English). Studies were required to include primary report-back (e.g., direct return of results to participants) or detailed descriptions of RBRR methods or recommendations. The review followed a PE/IO (Population, Exposure, Intervention, Outcome) framework and adhered to PRISMA guidelines. Risk of bias was assessed using the STROBE cohort study checklist and GRADE criteria. Across studies, RBRR was framed as an ethical obligation, and an opportunity to improve understanding of environmental influences on health. Most emphasized plain-language communication (n = 8), multimodal dissemination (n = 10), and culturally responsive design (n = 4). However, only three studies applied formal communication or evaluation frameworks, and only one-third described how materials were developed. Common evaluation methods included post-report surveys (n = 22), interviews (n = 18), and focus groups (n = 14), however, we noted a lack of consistency in evaluation methods. Collectively, these 32 studies underscored the importance of tailoring materials to population characteristics, providing multiple formats, and experimenting with visual and digital tools to enhance comprehension. Although none cited a bioethical framework, the core principles were reflected in practice: respect for autonomy through participants’ right to know their results; beneficence through the development of accessible, actionable materials; nonmaleficence through anticipating and mitigating anxiety or confusion; and justice through culturally and linguistically appropriate design. Yet, gaps remain, with inconsistent characterization of RBRR methods and limited evaluation of RBRR. This study was limited by the risk of bias in participant selection, as many studies included participants with prior interest in the field of environmental health or emotional investment in the studies. Ethical RBRR supports both individual and collective knowledge and action when paired with ongoing community engagement. Developing consistent, evidence-based best practices that balance feasibility with contextual relevance could strengthen trust, comprehension, and the translation of scientific findings into meaningful public-health action. The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12940-026-01281-z.

Background Understanding how chemical exposure varies within and between people over time is a critical component of characterizing the exposome—the totality of lifetime exposures. However, variability remains an understudied aspect of exposomic research. Objective Our objective was to investigate trends in variability for chemical exposure data between and within people that appear across differing study designs. Methods Thirty-five people in Eugene, Oregon, and 46 people in St. Helens, Oregon, wore silicone wristbands over multiple seasons, including a span of heavy wildfire smoke in Eugene. Each participant wore between four and 14 wristbands. We analyzed 586 wristbands for 94 (Eugene) and 58 (St. Helens) chemicals. While analytic tests differed between the studies, the same 43 polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) were measured in both studies. We also evaluated three environmental variables for their impact on chemical concentrations. We fit generalized mixed effects models to each chemical, and used variance partitioning to understand and quantify sources of variability across environmental factors and inter- and intra-individual variables. Results We observed PAHs that were consistent within people across different days. For a subset of these PAHs, results did not agree well between studies, indicating the importance of measuring chemical data at different time points across studies. Environmental variables were not sufficient for explaining data variability for most chemicals. Only 21% and 30% of the modeled chemicals for Eugene and St. Helens, respectively, had a combined environmental variable R² at or above 0.1. Yet, environmental factors still revealed valuable information; we observed higher combined R² values for styrene, o-xylene, ethylbenzene, and phenanthrene in the Eugene detection model, which came from a combination of fine particulate matter and smoke density information. Impact Statement Our manuscript is the largest investigation of intra- and inter- variability in silicone wristband concentrations, containing over 23,000 chemical data points across two different personal chemical exposure studies. Certain chemicals were consistent within people across different days. For a subset of chemicals, results did not agree well between the two wristband studies. Our findings highlight the importance of measuring chemical data at different time points across studies to better understand the exposome. Environmental variables included in this study were not sufficient for explaining the data variability for most chemicals.

The ethical obligation of reporting back research results (RBRR) is established. Yet the ethical dimensions of how RBRR is implemented remain largely unexplored. The Environmental influences on Child Health Outcomes (ECHO) program has identified logistical challenges in RBRR, citing limited guidance resources as a key obstacle. The objective of this research was to characterize and assess ethical considerations for RBRR: (i) with or without clinical significance; (ii) within a pregnancy cohort, and; (iii) within a study population with diverse cultural and traditional contexts. Expert Panelists (n = 20), including exposure scientists, community engagement specialists, public health researchers, clinicians and ethicists convened virtually and completed short surveys to identify ethical considerations regarding how RBRR is conducted. While the original objective was to characterize ethical guidelines for RBRR across three potential outcomes, the Panel identified a need for RBRR harmonization; conflicting and inconsistently applied terminology and definitions prevented the Panel from fully discussing the original topics. Ethical considerations for conducting RBRR were mapped to the principles of bioethics (respect for autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice), with Panelists suggesting that additional ethical frameworks could be used in parallel or as a replacement. However, when considering results with or without clinical significance, the Panel identified a clear need for standardized terminology when describing RBRR, particularly regarding the relevance of results to individual health, behavior, and knowledge. The Panel recommended the following related to RBRR: (i) develop centralized resources; (ii) develop multi-use materials; (iii) ensure clear assignment of RBRR responsibility within research projects; (iv) encourage active engagement of research participants in the RBRR process to foster and maintain trust; (v) recognize community-level harms and benefits; (vi) extend RBRR beyond study completion; and, (vii) establish standardized language. The Panel highlighted challenges such as non-standard terminology and difficulty discerning between RBRR with clear health or regulatory standards versus results without established, quantified health relationships. The Panel affirmed all research results, regardless of established health relationships, that benefit participants should be returned. While RBRR guidelines were considered universal, the Panel emphasized the need for nuanced considerations, particularly when working with culturally diverse or pregnant populations. Future work should address ethical considerations regarding RBRR’s responsibilities for depositing data in a public-use repository.

We are Indigenous knowledge holders, herbalists, academics, and community environmental health staff who have the honor and responsibility of curating and sharing knowledge about traditional plants and medicines. Together, we created the Native Plants and Foods Curriculum Portal. This online sharing platform increases accessibility to Indigenous knowledge that is vital to the wellbeing of our environment and all those within it. In this article, we tell our story to concurrently share the knowledge itself as well as the importance of respecting the knowledge and the responsibility of holding that knowledge.

Americans spend approximately 90% of their time indoors, with more than 66% of that time spent in residential buildings. Factors pertaining to household behavior or environmental factors may influence types of semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOC) found indoors. Paired indoor and outdoor passive samplers were deployed at twenty-four locations across the United States. Samples were analyzed for >1500 SVOCs to identify common patterns in exposure profiles and investigate influences of household behavior and environmental factors. Unique differences between indoor and outdoor profiles were identified, with indoor air typically having greater frequency and concentration of SVOCs relative to outdoor air. A significant relationship between fragrance chemicals and scented consumer products was identified. When considering a multifactorial approach, chemical exposures were most influenced by environmental and demographic factors. Our data highlights specific groups of chemicals identified at higher concentrations indoors and their potential influences, as well as the complexity of identifying specific sources of chemical exposures.

Rapid health outcome data acquisition using existing questionnaires can greatly facilitate time-sensitive research during or after a wildfire event. We aimed to develop a readily available library of questionnaires for self-reported health outcomes to serve as a centralized platform for wildfire researchers seeking to quickly design instruments tailored to their research aims. In this paper, we describe the methodology used to identify relevant health questionnaires and compile them into a structured library. We first followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 checklist and performed a systematic literature review of prior research on wildfire exposure and health and used this to 1) identify health outcome categories associated with wildfire and smoke exposure and 2) extract questionnaires used for self-report of health outcomes related to wildfire exposure. We also performed a secondary search of existing questionnaire repositories to identify additional instruments relevant to health impacts of wildfire exposure. All questionnaires (n=100) were organized by eight health outcome categories (mental health = 60, respiratory health = 19, overall health = 17, sleep = 10, cardiovascular health = 4, allergy = 1, irritation (eye, throat, skin) = 2, and metabolic health = 1). The library (see supplementary information) will be accompanied by a decision-tree framework in development, which will assist future users in building new questionnaires that best fit their study population and research aims. Both the questionnaire library and the forthcoming decision-support framework will be publicly accessible to researchers, public health agencies, and other groups interested in rapid response data collection to characterize the impacts of wildfires. Additionally, this method of creating a wildfire exposure health questionnaire library may serve as a template for rapid collection of questionnaire-based data following other disasters.