These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Are we reaching the target audience? Evaluation of a fish fact sheet.
    Author: Burger J, Waishwell L.
    Journal: Sci Total Environ; 2001 Sep 28; 277(1-3):77-86. PubMed ID: 11589410.
    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.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]