Literature DB >> 11589410

Are we reaching the target audience? Evaluation of a fish fact sheet.

J Burger1, L Waishwell.   

Abstract

According to the US Environmental Protection Agency, over 16% of freshwater lakes and 7% of the rivers are under some sort of fish consumption advisory because of the presence of toxic chemicals. There is considerable interest in the issuing of information, advisories, and fact sheets concerning the consumption of wild-caught fish from contaminated waters, and in the actual consumption patterns of subsistence and recreational anglers. Despite the large number of consumption advisories issued by state agencies, there is little information on how these advisories, or other forms of risk communication, are perceived by target audiences, notably fishermen and women of child-bearing age. The states of South Carolina and Georgia issue consumption advisories for fish from the Savannah River, among other sites. To gain a greater insight into the perception of anglers about a supplemental fish fact sheet jointly developed by South Carolina, Georgia, federal agencies, and the Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation, we interviewed fisherman along the Savannah River. The objectives were to determine: (1) whether they had previously read the Fish Fact Sheet or had heard about the consumption advisories; (2) what major message they obtained from the sheet; (3) who they felt the fact sheet was aimed at, and who should get the Fish Fact Sheet; (4) who should be concerned about health risks from consuming the fish; and (5) the best method of disseminating such information. We interviewed 92 fishermen (37% black, 62% white) during the fishing season of 1999. Half had heard some information about consumption advisories, mainly from the media (64%). The study concluded that there were no ethnic differences in whether they had heard about the advisories, understood the major message of the fact sheet, felt they could reduce their risk from consuming the fish, or felt that it made a difference which agency issued the fact sheet. There were significant ethnic differences in the ways people thought the risk from eating fish could be reduced, sources of information about the risks from consuming fish, and what other information they would like about the risks associated with contaminated fish.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11589410     DOI: 10.1016/s0048-9697(00)00864-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Total Environ        ISSN: 0048-9697            Impact factor:   7.963


  6 in total

1.  A qualitative exploration of fishing and fish consumption in the Gullah/Geechee culture.

Authors:  Jamelle H Ellis; Daniela B Friedman; Robin Puett; Geoffrey I Scott; Dwayne E Porter
Journal:  J Community Health       Date:  2014-12

2.  Anglers' Views on Using Signs to Communicate Fish Consumption Advisories.

Authors:  Kathleen M Gray; Catherine E LePrevost; W Gregory Cope
Journal:  Fisheries (Bethesda)       Date:  2020-05-21       Impact factor: 2.939

Review 3.  Communication about environmental health risks: a systematic review.

Authors:  Donna Fitzpatrick-Lewis; Jennifer Yost; Donna Ciliska; Shari Krishnaratne
Journal:  Environ Health       Date:  2010-11-01       Impact factor: 5.984

4.  Fishing, fish consumption, and awareness about warnings in a university community in central New Jersey in 2007, and comparisons with 2004.

Authors:  Joanna Burger
Journal:  Environ Res       Date:  2008-07-15       Impact factor: 6.498

5.  Factors influencing acquisition of ecological and exposure information about hazards and risks from contaminated sites.

Authors:  Joanna Burger; Michael Greenberg; Michael Gochfeld; Sheila Shukla; Karen Lowrie; Roger Keren
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2007-07-11       Impact factor: 2.513

6.  Regional and temporal trends in blood mercury concentrations and fish consumption in women of child bearing Age in the united states using NHANES data from 1999-2010.

Authors:  Leanne K Cusack; Ellen Smit; Molly L Kile; Anna K Harding
Journal:  Environ Health       Date:  2017-02-17       Impact factor: 5.984

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.