Skip to main content
. 2018 May 16;13(5):e0195375. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0195375

Table 4. Environmental literacy and screening practices by whether subjects had read the environmental committee opinion.

Characteristic Value Yes
n = 36
Number (% of total)
No
n = 254
Number (% of total)
p
Do you routinely screen new patients for any of the following?
(Choose all that apply)
Prenatal vitamin use 35(97) 229(90) 0.222
Supplement use 36(100) 182(72) < .001
Tobacco use 36(100) 251(99) .99
Alcohol use 36(100) 245(96) 0.385
Exercise habits 28(78) 180(71) 0.436
Dietary habits 27(75) 157(62) 0.142
Domestic abuse 27(75) 192(76) .99
Fish intake 12(33) 60(24) 0.219
Occupational exposures 14(39) 53(21) 0.021
Environmental chemicals 10(28) 24(10) 0.004
Other 3(8) 8(3) 0.144
Which of the following environmental exposures do you routinely ask your patients about?
(Choose all that apply)
Lead exposure 10(28) 29(11) 0.012
Mercury exposure 8(22) 31(12) 0.116
Pesticide use 8(22) 15(6) 0.003
Occupational exposure 18(50) 73(29) 0.013
Air pollution exposure 5(14) 24(10) 0.552
Plastics for food storage 3(8) 2(1) 0.015
Water source 2(6) 10(4) 0.65
Personal care products 5(14) 17(7) 0.168
Household cleaners 5(14) 11(4) 0.035
Knowledge to counsel environmental chemicals/adverse health 5(14) 4(2) 0.002
Training to discuss with a patient how to reduce exposure 4(11) 25(10) 0.99
Know where to refer a patient 16(44) 63(25) 0.017
Comfort obtaining environmental history? 8(23) 35(14) 0.16
Environmental exposure survey? 7(19) 37(15) 0.606

Values reported are frequency and column percentage. N = 22 providers not responding to read exposure to exposure to toxic environmental agents question omitted