Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Researchers participate in a hands-on training program on returning personal exposure results, and pre- and post-tests assess outcomes shifts in knowledge and perspectives on its value, and willingness to implement report-back in current or future studies.
The investigators study the outcomes from a program that trains researchers to implement report-back, informs perspectives on the value of report-back, increases likelihood of adoption, and promotes insights from visualization of results. The investigators evaluate the training using pre- and post-tests. The training program includes an introductory module on ethical and practical benefits and best practices for report-back. This is followed by a session where researchers gain hands-on practice in report preparation using Digital Exposure Report-Back Interface (DERBI), a digital report-back tool. Pre- and post-tests assess outcomes related to their prior concerns about report-back, knowledge about report-back, shifts in perspectives on its value, novel insights about data from Researcher- DERBI, and willingness to implement report-back in current and future studies.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Report-back training program | Other | Researchers participate in a training program on sharing personal results. Pre-and post-tests are administered to evaluate shifts in perspectives and wiliness to report-back before and after the training program. There is no control group. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Report-back training | Behavioral | Researchers participate in a report-back training program to evaluate potential impacts on knowledge and future behaviors with respect to sharing personal exposure results with study participants. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Beliefs About Report-back, Before and After Training Program | Participants ranked how strongly they agreed with each statement using a Likert-scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). | Participants completed surveys before and after the training program. |
| Concern About Report-back, Before and After Training Program | Participants ranked how strongly they agreed with each of 3 statements about concerns about report-back using a Likert-scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Responses were summed together to calculate sum concern (3-15). Higher values indicate greater concern about report-back so a higher post-test score would indicate a worse outcome (i.e., that concern about report-back increased as a result of the training program. | Participants completed surveys before and after the single-day training program. |
| Perceived Benefits of Report-back, Before and After Training Program | Participants ranked how strongly they agreed with each of 5 statements about perceived benefits of report-back using a Likert-scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Responses were summed together to calculate sum perceived benefits (5-25). Higher values indicate stronger agreement with perceived benefits, so a higher post-test score would indicate a better outcome (i.e., that perceived benefits of report-back increased as a result of the training program). | Participants completed surveys before and after the single-day training program. |
Not provided
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Virtual and in-person across the U.S. | Newton | Massachusetts | 024600000 | United States |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Participants were not assigned to an arm or group. Rather, for all individuals who participated in a report-back training program, we evaluated any shifts in participants perspectives on environmental health report-back and wiliness to report-back with pre- and post-tests.
We facilitated report-back training workshops, including two in-person workshops at the International Society for Epidemiology (ISEE) and Partnerships for Environmental Public Health (PEPH) conferences, and three virtual workshops. Participants were recruited through conferences advertising the workshops (e.g., during conference registration), and through emailing individuals directly from a list we compiled of NIH-funded environmental health researchers.
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| FG000 | Report-back Training Program | Researchers participate in a training program on sharing personal results. Pre-and post-tests are administered to evaluate shifts in perspectives and wiliness to report-back before and after the training program. |
| Title | Milestones | Reasons Not Completed | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Study |
|
The baseline analysis population (N=56) includes everyone who completed both a pre- and post-test (n=34), those who only completed a pre-test and no post-test (n=21), and those who only completed a post-test (n=1).The number of baseline participants is the same as the number of participants in the flow table because this number incorporates everyone enrolled who completed a survey at any time point. In outcome measures, we report only on those who completed both pre-and post-tests (n=34).
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| BG000 | Report-back Training Program | Researchers participate in a training program on sharing personal results. Pre-and post-tests are administered to evaluate experiences with report-back, and shifts in perspectives and wiliness to report-back before and after the training program. There is no control group. |
| Units | Counts |
|---|---|
| Participants |
|
| Title | Description | Population Description | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Denominator Units Selected | Denominators | Classes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Continuous | We did not collect information on age. |
| Type | Title | Description | Population Description | Reporting Status | Anticipated Posting Date | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Time Frame | Units Analyzed | Denominator Units Selected | Arm/Group Information | Denominators | Classes | Analyses | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | Beliefs About Report-back, Before and After Training Program | Participants ranked how strongly they agreed with each statement using a Likert-scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). | Only participants who completed both pre-and post-tests are included in the analyses. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Score on a scale | Participants completed surveys before and after the training program. |
|
Participants took part in a training program on environmental health report-back that was evaluated with pre- and post-tests. There was no adverse event data collected.
There was no data collected on adverse events, including mortality or other serious adverse events. Participants took part in a brief (less than half-day) workshop on environmental report-back. There was a presentation on report-back and then participants received hands-on experience in creating reports. We evaluated this with pre- and post-tests.
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description | Deaths (Affected) | Deaths (At Risk) | Serious Events (Affected) | Serious Events (At Risk) | Other Events (Affected) | Other Events (At Risk) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EG000 | Report-back Training Program | Researchers participate in a training program on sharing personal results. Pre-and post-tests are administered to evaluate shifts in perspectives and wiliness to report-back before and after the training program. There is no control group. |
Not provided
Not provided
Individuals who participated in the workshop skewed towards having an interest in report-back and being more familiar with its benefits
| Title | Organization | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dr. Jennifer Liss Ohayon | Silent Spring Institute | 617-332-4288 | ohayon@silentspring.org |
Not provided
| Type | Includes Protocol | Includes SAP | Includes ICF | Document Label | Document Date | Document Uploaded Date | Document File Name |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prot_SAP | Yes | Yes | No | Study Protocol and Statistical Analysis Plan | Jan 30, 2026 | Jan 30, 2026 | Prot_SAP_000.pdf |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
We did not collect information on age for any of the participants.
| Mean |
| Standard Deviation |
| Years |
|
| Sex/Gender, Customized | Male, female, unknown/not reported | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Race (NIH/OMB) | Racial categories | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Region of Enrollment | Number | Participants |
|
| Units | Counts |
|---|---|
| Participants |
|
|
| Primary | Concern About Report-back, Before and After Training Program | Participants ranked how strongly they agreed with each of 3 statements about concerns about report-back using a Likert-scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Responses were summed together to calculate sum concern (3-15). Higher values indicate greater concern about report-back so a higher post-test score would indicate a worse outcome (i.e., that concern about report-back increased as a result of the training program. | Only participants who completed both pre-and post-tests are included in the analyses. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Scores on a scale | Participants completed surveys before and after the single-day training program. |
|
|
|
| Primary | Perceived Benefits of Report-back, Before and After Training Program | Participants ranked how strongly they agreed with each of 5 statements about perceived benefits of report-back using a Likert-scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Responses were summed together to calculate sum perceived benefits (5-25). Higher values indicate stronger agreement with perceived benefits, so a higher post-test score would indicate a better outcome (i.e., that perceived benefits of report-back increased as a result of the training program). | Only participants who completed both pre-and post-tests are included in the analyses. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Scores on a scale | Participants completed surveys before and after the single-day training program. |
|
|
|
| 0 |
| 0 |
| 0 |
| 0 |
| 0 |
| 0 |
Not provided
Not provided