Effectiveness and cost of recruitment strategies for a community-based randomised controlled trial among rainwater drinkers

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Community-based recruitment is challenging particularly if the sampling frame is not easily defined as in the case of people who drink rainwater. Strategies for contacting participants must be carefully considered to maximise generalisability and minimise bias of the results. This paper assesses the recruitment strategies for a 1-year double-blinded randomised trial on drinking untreated rainwater. The effectiveness of the recruitment strategies and associated costs are described.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Community recruitment of households from Adelaide, Australia occurred from February to July 2007 using four methods: electoral roll mail-out, approaches to schools and community groups, newspaper advertising, and other media involvement. Word of mouth communication was also assessed.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A total of 810 callers were screened, with 53.5% eligible. Of those who were eligible and sent further information, 76.7% were willing to participate in the study and 75.1% were enrolled. The target for recruitment was 300 households, and this was achieved. The mail-out was the most effective method with respect to number of households randomised, while recruitment via schools had the highest yield (57.3%) and was the most cost effective when considering cost per household randomised (AUD$147.20). Yield and cost effectiveness were lowest for media advertising.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The use of electoral roll mail-out and advertising via schools were effective in reaching households using untreated rainwater for drinking. Employing multiple strategies enabled success in achieving the recruitment target. In countries where electoral roll extracts are available to researchers, this method is likely to have a high yield for recruitment into community-based epidemiological studies.</p

Allotment gardening and health: a comparative survey among allotment gardeners and their neighbors without an allotment

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The potential contribution of allotment gardens to a healthy and active life-style is increasingly recognized, especially for elderly populations. However, few studies have empirically examined beneficial effects of allotment gardening. In the present study the health, well-being and physical activity of older and younger allotment gardeners was compared to that of controls without an allotment.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A survey was conducted among 121 members of 12 allotment sites in the Netherlands and a control group of 63 respondents without an allotment garden living next to the home addresses of allotment gardeners. The survey included five self-reported health measures (perceived general health, acute health complaints, physical constraints, chronic illnesses, and consultations with GP), four self-reported well-being measures (stress, life satisfaction, loneliness, and social contacts with friends) and one measure assessing self-reported levels of physical activity in summer. Respondents were divided into a younger and older group at the median of 62 years which equals the average retirement age in the Netherlands.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>After adjusting for income, education level, gender, stressful life events, physical activity in winter, and access to a garden at home as covariates, both younger and older allotment gardeners reported higher levels of physical activity during the summer than neighbors in corresponding age categories. The impacts of allotment gardening on health and well-being were moderated by age. Allotment gardeners of 62 years and older scored significantly or marginally better on all measures of health and well-being than neighbors in the same age category. Health and well-being of younger allotment gardeners did not differ from younger neighbors. The greater health and well-being benefits of allotment gardening for older gardeners may be related to the finding that older allotment gardeners were more oriented towards gardening and being active, and less towards passive relaxation.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>These findings are consistent with the notion that having an allotment garden may promote an active life-style and contribute to healthy aging. However, the findings may be limited by self selection and additional research is needed to confirm and extend the current findings.</p

Protective management of trees against debarking by deer negatively impacts bryophyte diversity

When wildlife populations become too large, they impact other flora and fauna within the ecosystems that they inhabit. For example, the recent rise in population numbers of sika deer in Japan has led to the stripping of bark from tree overstories in forested areas. This has led to protective management actions, such as wrapping the trunks of trees in wire mesh. The present study investigates the impact of this management action on epiphytic diversity at Mt. Ohdaigahara, which is one of the hotspots for bryophyte diversity in Japan. The correlation between the diversity of epiphytic bryophytes and environmental variables was examined, including the presence/absence of wire mesh protection. A generalized linear model showed that species richness and bryophyte cover was significantly correlated with both tree diameter (at 1.5 m height) and tree density (P < 0.01), but negatively correlated with wire mesh protection. Inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry analysis showed a significant 3- to 6-fold higher concentration of zinc in bryophytes occupying tree bark under wire mesh protection than for those without wire mesh. Hence, the high sensitivity of bryophytes to zinc accumulation, as a result of toxicity caused by galvanized iron mesh, has led to the loss of species richness and bryophyte cover on tree trunks. Furthermore, other heavy metals found in wire mesh may also contribute to the negative effect on bryophytes. Therefore, to establish best practices for biodiversity conservation that include bryophytes, materials that are free of heavy metals should be preferentially used for tree protection

Ancillary human health benefits of improved air quality resulting from climate change mitigation

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation policies can provide ancillary benefits in terms of short-term improvements in air quality and associated health benefits. Several studies have analyzed the ancillary impacts of GHG policies for a variety of locations, pollutants, and policies. In this paper we review the existing evidence on ancillary health benefits relating to air pollution from various GHG strategies and provide a framework for such analysis.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We evaluate techniques used in different stages of such research for estimation of: (1) changes in air pollutant concentrations; (2) avoided adverse health endpoints; and (3) economic valuation of health consequences. The limitations and merits of various methods are examined. Finally, we conclude with recommendations for ancillary benefits analysis and related research gaps in the relevant disciplines.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We found that to date most assessments have focused their analysis more heavily on one aspect of the framework (e.g., economic analysis). While a wide range of methods was applied to various policies and regions, results from multiple studies provide strong evidence that the short-term public health and economic benefits of ancillary benefits related to GHG mitigation strategies are substantial. Further, results of these analyses are likely to be underestimates because there are a number of important unquantified health and economic endpoints.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Remaining challenges include integrating the understanding of the relative toxicity of particulate matter by components or sources, developing better estimates of public health and environmental impacts on selected sub-populations, and devising new methods for evaluating heretofore unquantified and non-monetized benefits.</p

Climate change effects on people’s livelihood

Generally climate is defined as the long-term average weather conditions of a particular place, region, or the world. Key climate variables include surface conditions such as temperature, precipitation, and wind. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) broadly defined climate change as any change in the state of climate which persists for extended periods, usually for decades or longer (Allwood et al. 2014). Climate change may occur due to nature’s both internal and external processes. External process involves anthropogenic emission of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere, and volcanic eruptions. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) made a distinction between climate change attributable to human contribution to atmospheric composition and natural climate variability. In its Article 1, the UNFCCC defines climate change as “a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods” (United Nations 1992, p. 7)