Search

Agriculture is a hazardous industry, yet there are few regulations on the ages at which children may engage in farm work. Local agricultural market producers (LAMPs) are a growing subset of farmers within "sustainable agriculture" who engage in direct-to-consumer and direct-to-retailer enterprises. This study explores the occupational health and safety perceptions of parents and children for children who work on their families' LAMP farms. In-depth interviews were conducted with 12 parent-child dyads from LAMP farms in Illinois and North Carolina. Four themes emerged from these 24 interviews; parents and children perceived that: (1) the nature of small farms makes them safer than industrial agricultural operations; (2) child safety on farms is common sense; (3) avoiding hazardous tasks keeps children safe; and (4) parents know best (compared to regulations) about ways to keep their children safe. Some of these themes echo the results of earlier studies conducted with more conventional farms. Further research is needed to develop programs to improve child occupational safety on LAMP farms.

Community-based participatory research (CBPR) seeks to conduct relevant, sustainable research that is tailored to the needs of the communities with which it is engaged through equitable collaboration between community representatives and professional researchers. Like other participatory approaches to research and planning, CBPR has been criticized for the potential to engage a biased sample of community representatives and, thereby, undermine the fundamental purpose of the approach. Moreover, the varying educational levels and areas of expertise, especially regarding science literacy, among those participating in CBPR has raised concern about the ability for true collaboration to exist within CBPR projects. This article presents findings from a qualitative study of 25 CBPR research projects and explores matters of science literacy, community representation, and the nature of CBPR. Ultimately, it is suggested that those who engage in CBPR should carefully consider the potential for biased community representation and seek to purposely and mindfully avoid any partiality.

This analysis describes the nature of community participation in National Institutes of Health and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention funded community-based participatory research (CBPR) projects, and explores the scientific and social implications of variation in community participation. We conducted in-depth interviews in 2012 with professional and community researchers from 25 CBPR projects in the Southeast US. Interview topics focused on participants' experiences with the nature and conduct of their CBPR project. Projects were rated on community participation in 13 components of research. Projects varied substantially in community participation. Some projects had community participation in only two to three components; others had participation in every component. Some professional researchers were deliberate in their inclusion of community participation in all aspects of research, others had community participation in some aspects, and others were mainly concerned that community members had the opportunity to participate in the study. Findings suggest a need for a standardized rubric for community-based research that facilitates delineation of approaches and procedures that are effective and efficient. Little actual community participation may also result in negative social impacts for communities., (© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

This analysis describes (1) cell phone and smartphone ownership, (2) continuity of phone numbers, (3) use of specific technologies while inside and outside the U.S., and (4) perceived adequacy of specific formats to receive health research results among Latino farmworkers. Telecommunications questionnaires were administered to 165 and 102 farmworkers in North Carolina in 2012 and 2013, respectively. Univariate and bivariate analyses were completed. Increasing numbers of Latino farmworkers own cell phones and smartphones. Talk and text functions are used frequently. Relatively few farmworkers maintain consistent phone numbers. They prefer to receive study results through low technology formats. Strategies to use cell phones to improve health or to share research findings will face obstacles in this population. Public health officials who identify and implement effective strategies to overcome these barriers may be able to harness mobile technologies to address the needs of Latino farmworkers.

Objective: Heat exposure is an important hazard for workers in manual occupations, including farmworkers. This analysis delineates the prevalence of heat illness among farmworkers, and the factors associated with heat illness., Methods: North Carolina Latino male farmworkers completed interviews in August, 2013. They reported on heat exposure and behaviors over the previous 3 months while working both outdoors and indoors., Results: A third (35.6%) of the participants reported heat illness while working outside, and 13.9% while working inside. Factors associated with heat illness while working outside included working in wet clothes and shoes, harvesting and topping tobacco, and spending after-work time in an extremely hot house., Conclusions: Policy addressing heat illness is needed, as is more detailed research on occupational heat exposure that uses common measures.

Scientific integrity is necessary for strong science; yet many variables can influence scientific integrity. In traditional research, some common threats are the pressure to publish, competition for funds, and career advancement. Community-based participatory research (CBPR) provides a different context for scientific integrity with additional and unique concerns. Understanding the perceptions that promote or discourage scientific integrity in CBPR as identified by professional and community investigators is essential to promoting the value of CBPR. This analysis explores the perceptions that facilitate scientific integrity in CBPR as well as the barriers among a sample of 74 professional and community CBPR investigators from 25 CBPR projects in nine states in the southeastern United States in 2012. There were variations in perceptions associated with team member identity as professional or community investigators. Perceptions identified to promote and discourage scientific integrity in CBPR by professional and community investigators were external pressures, community participation, funding, quality control and supervision, communication, training, and character and trust. Some perceptions such as communication and training promoted scientific integrity whereas other perceptions, such as a lack of funds and lack of trust could discourage scientific integrity. These results demonstrate that one of the most important perceptions in maintaining scientific integrity in CBPR is active community participation, which enables a co-responsibility by scientists and community members to provide oversight for scientific integrity. Credible CBPR science is crucial to empower the vulnerable communities to be heard by those in positions of power and policy making., (© 2015 Society for Public Health Education.)

Introduction: In the USA, migrant farmworkers are a vulnerable group due to their low socioeconomic status, risk of occupational exposures and injury, lack of social mobility, lack of adequate access to health services and dependency on employer for provided housing. Previous reports have documented migrant farmworker housing conditions to be variable, but poor overall. This paper explores the perceptions of housing conditions among migrant farmworkers in rural North Carolina, and develops an understanding of potential impacts of their housing on health and safety., Methods: This study used qualitative descriptive data and directed content analysis to analyse semi-structured interviews and photographs that were data elements of a larger community-based participatory research study designed to document housing quality and health among North Carolina farmworkers., Results: Many of the study participants described poor housing conditions that were reflected in the photographic analysis of the houses and camps. Specific problems described by the participants include exposure to pesticides, safety issues, pests, water supply and air quality, temperature and moisture., Conclusions: This study describes migrant farmworkers' perceptions of housing quality and numerous potential impacts on health and safety. Research, social policy and practice-based implications derived from this research could serve to improve the health status of these individuals and their families. This study suggests there is much room for sustained advocacy and action, given that many of the farmworkers' descriptions and photographs depicted housing conditions below accepted standards of living. Access to adequate and safe employer-provided housing for migrant farmworkers should be considered a basic human right.

Community-based participatory research (CBPR) has become essential in health disparities and environmental justice research; however, the scientific integrity of CBPR projects has become a concern. Some concerns, such as appropriate research training, lack of access to resources and finances, have been discussed as possibly limiting the scientific integrity of a project. Prior to understanding what threatens scientific integrity in CBPR, it is vital to understand what scientific integrity means for the professional and community investigators who are involved in CBPR. This analysis explores the interpretation of scientific integrity in CBPR among 74 professional and community research team members from of 25 CBPR projects in nine states in the southeastern United States in 2012. It describes the basic definition for scientific integrity and then explores variations in the interpretation of scientific integrity in CBPR. Variations in the interpretations were associated with team member identity as professional or community investigators. Professional investigators understood scientific integrity in CBPR as either conceptually or logistically flexible, as challenging to balance with community needs, or no different than traditional scientific integrity. Community investigators interpret other factors as important in scientific integrity, such as trust, accountability, and overall benefit to the community. This research demonstrates that the variations in the interpretation of scientific integrity in CBPR call for a new definition of scientific integrity in CBPR that takes into account the understanding and needs of all investigators., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)