NCT06729775

Brief Summary

There remains a need for novel research that facilitates RBRR in a manner that raises data and environmental health literacy (D/EHL) and supports communities striving for environmental health and structural change. Rooted in bioethics and building upon trusted and established long-term partnerships and leveraging existing datasets, the project goal is to create and pilot a national model of report back that is centered in the margins and engages diverse rural and urban EJ communities to ensure that RBRR reaches all populations in a manner tailored to their individual needs, including culture, life stage, language, and design.

Trial Health

77
On Track

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Enrollment
1,546

participants targeted

Target at P75+ for not_applicable

Timeline
24mo left

Started Feb 2025

Typical duration for not_applicable

Geographic Reach
1 country

1 active site

Status
recruiting

Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.

Trial Relationships

Click on a node to explore related trials.

Study Timeline

Key milestones and dates

Study Progress38%
Feb 2025May 2028

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

November 25, 2024

Completed
16 days until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

December 11, 2024

Completed
2 months until next milestone

Study Start

First participant enrolled

February 21, 2025

Completed
3.2 years until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

May 1, 2028

Expected
Same day until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

May 1, 2028

Last Updated

April 8, 2025

Status Verified

April 1, 2025

Enrollment Period

3.2 years

First QC Date

November 25, 2024

Last Update Submit

April 4, 2025

Conditions

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (8)

  • Changes from baseline in the mean literacy and numeracy based on questionnaire responses.

    Likert scale where one is equivalent to "Disagree Very Strongly" and six is Agree Very Strongly.

    From enrollment to the end of treatment at 78 weeks

  • Changes from baseline in the mean knowledge and awareness risks based on questionnaire responses.

    Likert scale where one is equivalent to "Disagree Very Strongly" and six is Agree Very Strongly.

    From enrollment to the end of treatment at 78 weeks

  • Changes from baseline in the mean skills and self-efficacy based on questionnaire responses.

    Likert scale where one is equivalent to "Disagree Very Strongly" and six is Agree Very Strongly.

    From enrollment to the end of treatment at 78 weeks

  • Changes from baseline in the mean environmental health engagement based on questionnaire responses.

    Likert scale where one is equivalent to "Disagree Very Strongly" and six is Agree Very Strongly.

    From enrollment to the end of treatment at 78 weeks

  • Number of participants reporting themes related to literacy and numeracy.

    This is a qualitative analysis; words will be coded and analyzed to identify themes and sentiment's that arise in individual interviews and across all interviews and focus groups.

    From enrollment to the end of treatment at 78 weeks

  • Number of participants reporting themes related to knowledge and awareness risks

    This is a qualitative analysis; words will be coded and analyzed to identify themes and sentiment's that arise in individual interviews and across all interviews and focus groups.

    From enrollment to the end of treatment at 78 weeks

  • Number of participants reporting themes related to skills and self-efficacy

    This is a qualitative analysis; words will be coded and analyzed to identify themes and sentiment's that arise in individual interviews and across all interviews and focus groups.

    From enrollment to the end of treatment at 78 weeks

  • Number of participants reporting themes related to environmental health engagement.

    This is a qualitative analysis; words will be coded and analyzed to identify themes and sentiment's that arise in individual interviews and across all interviews and focus groups.

    From enrollment to the end of treatment at 78 weeks

Study Arms (9)

adolescence - graphical

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

adolescence (10\~19 yrs.) that receives a traditional graphical (figures/charts/tables) representation of environmental health/quality data

Other: Data report back preference by life span

adolescence - art-infused

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

adolescence (10\~19 yrs.) that receives an environment art representation of environmental health/quality data

Other: Data report back preference by life span

adolescence - geospatial

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

adolescence (10\~19 yrs.) that receives a geospatial representation of environmental health/quality data

Other: Data report back preference by life span

young adults - graphical

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

young adults (18-26 yrs.) that receives a traditional graphical (figures/charts/tables) representation of environmental health/quality data

Other: Data report back preference by life span

young adults - art-infused

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

young adults (18-26 yrs.) that receives an environment art representation of environmental health/quality data

Other: Data report back preference by life span

young adults - geospatial

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

young adults (18-26 yrs.) that receives a a geospatial representation of environmental health/quality data

Other: Data report back preference by life span

adults - graphical

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

adults (27 yrs.+) that receives a traditional graphical (figures/charts/tables) representation of environmental health/quality data

Other: Data report back preference by life span

adults - art-infused

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

adults (27 yrs.+) that receives an environment art representation of environmental health/quality data

Other: Data report back preference by life span

adults - geospatial

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

adults (27 yrs.+) that receives a geospatial representation of environmental health/quality data

Other: Data report back preference by life span

Interventions

Data report back preference by life span.

adolescence - art-infusedadolescence - geospatialadolescence - graphicaladults - art-infusedadults - geospatialadults - graphicalyoung adults - art-infusedyoung adults - geospatialyoung adults - graphical

Eligibility Criteria

Age10 Years+
Sexall
Healthy VolunteersYes
Age GroupsChild (0-17), Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

  • Participants should live in Pinal county, Arizona, Gila county, Arizona, and Cuyahoga county, Ohio.

You may not qualify if:

  • Individuals living outside of the partnering counties will not be eligible for participation.

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

Study Sites (1)

University of Arizona

Tucson, Arizona, 85721, United States

RECRUITING

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Health Education

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Adherence InterventionsMedication AdherencePatient CompliancePatient Acceptance of Health CareTreatment Adherence and ComplianceHealth BehaviorBehavior

Study Officials

  • Monica D Ramirez-Andreotta, PhD, Environmental Science

    University of Arizona

    PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Central Study Contacts

Monica D Ramirez-Andreotta, PhD, Environmental Science

CONTACT

Study Design

Study Type
interventional
Phase
not applicable
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Masking
NONE
Purpose
OTHER
Intervention Model
PARALLEL
Sponsor Type
OTHER
Responsible Party
SPONSOR

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

November 25, 2024

First Posted

December 11, 2024

Study Start

February 21, 2025

Primary Completion (Estimated)

May 1, 2028

Study Completion (Estimated)

May 1, 2028

Last Updated

April 8, 2025

Record last verified: 2025-04

Data Sharing

IPD Sharing
Will share

All data generated, including that used to produce both positive and negative study findings, will be preserved. We will develop a tiered approach for sharing metadata, data summaries, and datasets. In partnership with community-based team members, we will develop a process for external researchers to request access to community datasets in a manner consistent with the policies of each partnering organization. Based on discussions with partnering organizations, metadata for datasets may be posted to an external data repository, which will enable external researchers to identify datasets and initiate a data sharing request. All data sharing requests will require approval by the research team and partnering. If approved, then credentialed access will be provided by the appropriate database administrator to the Data Portal, a HIPAA compliant system. Congruent with UArizona and NIH data sharing policies, all de-identified public data will be shared in a publicly accessible data repository.

Shared Documents
STUDY PROTOCOL
Time Frame
This project follows a community-first reporting model. Working with community partners, scientific data will be made accessible as soon as possible, and no later than the time of an associated publication or the end of the performance period of the extramural award that generated the data, whichever occurs first. Data will remain in repositories for the length of time congruent with NIH and University of Arizona data sharing policies. The current minimum prescribed by NIH is three years following study closeout.
Access Criteria
Public data will be shared congruent with any redistribution restrictions. A de-identification process for HIPAA-compliant data will be initiated, with input from project partners. All data access will be controlled and credentialed, and made available by a data repository only after approval by the research team and community organizations. All data will be deidentified before publishing to data repositories or completing data sharing requests. Individual data-sharing requests will be evaluated to ensure human research participants' protection, rights, and confidentiality. The process for sharing de-identified environmental and survey data (numerical and spatial) will be articulated in the consent process (an opt-in approach). Sharing geospatial information with external partners will be discussed with the team and a policy will be developed that is aligned with community partners policies.

Locations