Toxic ignorance and right-to-know in biomonitoring results communication: a survey of scientists and study participants

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Exposure assessment has shifted from pollutant monitoring in air, soil, and water toward personal exposure measurements and biomonitoring. This trend along with the paucity of health effect data for many of the pollutants studied raise ethical and scientific challenges for reporting results to study participants.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We interviewed 26 individuals involved in biomonitoring studies, including academic scientists, scientists from environmental advocacy organizations, IRB officials, and study participants; observed meetings where stakeholders discussed these issues; and reviewed the relevant literature to assess emerging ethical, scientific, and policy debates about personal exposure assessment and biomonitoring, including public demand for information on the human health effects of chemical body burdens.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We identify three frameworks for report-back in personal exposure studies: clinical ethics; community-based participatory research; and citizen science 'data judo.' The first approach emphasizes reporting results only when the health significance of exposures is known, while the latter two represent new communication strategies where study participants play a role in interpreting, disseminating, and leveraging results to promote community health. We identify five critical areas to consider in planning future biomonitoring studies.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Public deliberation about communication in personal exposure assessment research suggests that new forms of community-based research ethics and participatory scientific practice are emerging.</p

Pooling job physical exposure data from multiple independent studies in a consortium study of carpal tunnel syndrome

Pooling data from different epidemiological studies of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) is necessary to improve statistical power and to more precisely quantify exposure–response relationships for MSDs. The pooling process is difficult and time-consuming, and small methodological differences could lead to different exposure–response relationships. A subcommittee of a six-study research consortium studying carpal tunnel syndrome: (i) visited each study site, (ii) documented methods used to collect physical exposure data and (iii) determined compatibility of exposure variables across studies. Certain measures of force, frequency of exertion and duty cycle were collected by all studies and were largely compatible. A portion of studies had detailed data to investigate simultaneous combinations of force, frequency and duration of exertions. Limited compatibility was found for hand/wrist posture. Only two studies could calculate compatible Strain Index scores, but Threshold Limit Value for Hand Activity Level could be determined for all studies. Challenges of pooling data, resources required and recommendations for future researchers are discussed