<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Vogel, Taylor</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Riley, Kylie W</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Samon, Sam</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Anderson, Kim A</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Armstrong, Georgina</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Barton, Michael</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Bondy, Melissa</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Bramer, Lisa</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Calero, Lehyla</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Cassidy-Bushrow, Andrea E</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Dixon, Holly M</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Herbstman, Julie</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Leach, Carrie</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Oluyomi, Abiodun</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Straughen, Jennifer K</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Waters, Katrina</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Rohlman, Diana</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Comparative Analysis of Report-back of Research Results Strategies for Personal Chemical Exposure Data.</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol</style></secondary-title><alt-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol</style></alt-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2026</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2026 Jun 09</style></date></pub-dates></dates><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;BACKGROUND: &lt;/strong&gt;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 &#039;one-size-fits-all&#039; approach.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;OBJECTIVE: &lt;/strong&gt;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.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;METHODS: &lt;/strong&gt;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.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;RESULTS: &lt;/strong&gt;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.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;SIGNIFICANCE: &lt;/strong&gt;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.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;IMPACT: &lt;/strong&gt;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.&lt;/p&gt;
</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ferris, Alana J</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Riley, Kylie W</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Calero, Lehyla</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Holmes, Darrell</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tobon, Catherine</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Gutierrez, Matthew</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Botelho, Julianne Cook</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Calafat, Antonia M</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Deyssenroth, Maya</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Anderson, Kim A</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Herbstman, Julie B</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Evaluating the use of silicone wristbands and urinary biomarkers to assess personal exposure to phthalates.</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol</style></secondary-title><alt-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol</style></alt-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2026</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2026 Apr 28</style></date></pub-dates></dates><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;BACKGROUND: &lt;/strong&gt;Biomonitoring studies for phthalates often rely on concentrations of urinary biomarkers, but there is interest in broadening exposure assessment methods, especially for use with vulnerable populations like pregnant women. Silicone wristbands (wristbands) are non-invasive passive sampling devices that have been shown as valid exposure assessment tools for a variety of chemicals and could provide a complementary method of phthalate exposure assessment.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;OBJECTIVE: &lt;/strong&gt;This study examined the relationship between phthalates detected in wristbands and their corresponding urinary metabolites to understand the ability of wristbands to capture phthalates.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;METHODS: &lt;/strong&gt;This pilot study included 27 pregnant women from the New York City-based longitudinal birth cohort study, the Fair Start Cohort. One wristband and spot urine samples provided at three time points were collected during a single 48-hour period. Six phthalate levels in wristbands were compared with the corresponding 12 urinary metabolite concentrations. Linear regressions and k-means clustering were employed to describe the relationship between, and information generated from wristband and urine matrices.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;RESULTS: &lt;/strong&gt;Three of the six parent phthalates were significantly positively associated with at least one of their metabolites in urine (butylbenzyl phthalate with monobenzyl phthalate; di-2-ethylhexyl phthalate with mono-2-ethylhexyl phthalate; di-iso-butyl phthalate with mono-hydroxy-isobutyl phthalate, mono-isobutyl phthalate, and the molar sum of these metabolites). Exposure marker profiles differed between wristband and urine matrices, which may reflect differences in routes of exposures.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;IMPACT: &lt;/strong&gt;This study demonstrates the ability of wristbands to capture personal exposure to phthalates and their substitutes. Additionally, using wristbands as an exposure assessment method could fill the gap in our understanding of the contribution of inhalation and dermal exposure routes for phthalate exposure, as these remain understudied in the literature.&lt;/p&gt;
</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Riley, Kylie W</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Burke, Kimberly</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Dixon, Holly</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Holmes, Darrell</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Calero, Lehyla</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Michael L Barton</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Miller, Rachel L</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Bramer, Lisa M</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Waters, Katrina M</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Kim A Anderson</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Herbstman, Julie</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Rohlman, Diana</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Development and Outcomes of Returning Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon Exposure Results in the Washington Heights, NYC Community.</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Environ Health Insights</style></secondary-title><alt-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Environ Health Insights</style></alt-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2024</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2024</style></date></pub-dates></dates><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">18</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">11786302241262604</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;Report-back of research results (RBRR) is becoming standard practice for environmental health research studies. RBRR is thought to increase environmental health literacy (EHL), although standardized measurements are limited. For this study, we developed a report back document on exposure to air pollutants, Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons, during pregnancy through community engaged research and evaluated whether the report increased EHL. We used focus groups and surveys to gather feedback on the report document from an initial group of study participants (Group 1, n = 22) and then sent the revised report to a larger number of participants (Group 2, n = 168). We conducted focus groups among participants in Group 1 and discussed their suggested changes to the report and how those changes could be implemented. Participants in focus groups demonstrated multiple levels of EHL. While participant engagement critically informed report development, a survey comparing feedback from Group 1 (initial report) and Group 2 (revised report) did not show a significant difference in the ease of reading the report or knowledge gained about air pollutants. We acknowledge that our approach was limited by a lack of EHL tools that assess knowledge and behavior change, and a reliance on quantitative methodologies. Future approaches that merge qualitative and quantitative methodologies to evaluate RBRR and methodologies for assessing RBRR materials and subsequent changes in knowledge, attitudes, and behavior, may be necessary.&lt;/p&gt;
</style></abstract></record></records></xml>