Solar UV Measured under Built-Shade in Public Parks: Findings from a Randomized Trial in Denver and Melbourne.

Reducing exposure to ultraviolet radiation (UV) is crucial for preventing UV-induced diseases of the skin and eyes. Shade may offer significant protection from UV. More empirical research to quantify the UV protection offered from built shade is needed to guide disease prevention practices and confidence in investment in shade. This study quantified UV levels under built-shade relative to unshaded passive recreation areas (PRAs) over summer months in parks in two cities. In a randomized controlled trial, n = 1144 UV measurements were conducted at the center and periphery of PRAs in a total sample of 144 public parks as part of pretest and posttest measures of use of the PRAs by park visitors for three recruitment waves per city during 2010 to 2014. Following pretest, 36 PRAs received built-shade and 108 did not. Regression analyses modelled pre-post change in UV (Standard Erythemal Dose (SED) per 30 min) at PRAs; and environmental predictors. Mean UV at the center of built-shade PRAs decreased from pretest to posttest (x¯ = 3.39, x¯ = 0.93 SED), a change of x¯ = -3.47 SED relative to control PRAs (p < 0.001) adjusting for the covariates of ambient SED, (cosine) solar elevation and cloud cover. Clouds decreased and solar elevation increased UV levels under shade. No significant differences in UV by shade design occurred. A substantial reduction in exposure to UV can be achieved using built-shade with shade cloth designs, offering considerable protection for shade users. Supplementary sun protection is recommended for extended periods of shade use during clear sky days.

Effect of an interactive educational activity using handheld ultraviolet radiation dosimeters on sun protection knowledge among Australian primary school students.

Ultraviolet radiation (UV) is the main cause of skin cancer, and children are a priority group for reducing UV exposure. We evaluated whether an interactive educational activity using handheld dosimeters improved UV-related knowledge among primary (elementary) school students. We conducted an uncontrolled before-after study among 427 students in grades 3-6 (ages 8-12 years) at five schools in the Greater Sydney region, Australia. Students used UV dosimeters to measure UV exposure, using the UV index scale, at different locations on their school grounds with and without different forms of sun protection, followed by an indoor classroom presentation and discussion. A 10-point anonymous questionnaire was completed by each student before and after the entire session (60-90 min). Before-after responses were compared using a generalised linear mixed model, adjusted for school, grade and gender. Overall, the mean raw scores increased from 6.3 (out of 10) before the intervention to 8.9 after the intervention, and the adjusted difference in scores was 2.6 points (95% confidence interval 2.4-2.8; p < 0.0001). Knowledge improved for all questions, with the greatest improvement for questions related to the UV Index (p < 0.05). The effect of the intervention was similar across different school, grade and gender groups. School and grade had no significant effect on mean survey scores, but girls scored an average 0.2 points higher than boys (95% confidence interval 0.1-0.4; p = 0.01). In conclusion, Australian primary school students had moderate knowledge about UV and sun protection, and knowledge improved significantly after a short interactive educational activity using handheld UV dosimeters.

Prevalence and Correlates of Observed Sun Protection Behaviors Across Different Public Outdoor Settings in Melbourne, Australia.

Skin cancer prevention efforts in Australia have increasingly incorporated a focus on protection during incidental sun exposure. This complements the long-present messages promoting protection in high-risk settings and avoidance of acute intense bouts of sun exposure. Data from two waves of a cross-sectional direct observational survey was used to assess the prevalence and correlates of N = 12,083 adolescents' and adults' sun protection behavior (arm and leg cover, hat, sunglasses, and shade cover). Individuals were observed in public outdoor settings in Melbourne, Australia during peak ultraviolet (UV) times (11 a.m.-3 p.m.) on summer weekends. Settings included pools and beaches, parks and gardens, and for the first time in 2018, outdoor streets and cafés which may capture more incidental forms of sun exposure and represent another public setting where Australians commonly spend time outdoors. Females and older adults were consistently better protected than males and adolescents. Physical activity was strongly associated with low shade cover across settings. Weather was more strongly associated with sun protection at outdoor streets/cafes and parks/gardens than at pools/beaches but use of observed sun protection (particularly arm cover and covering hat) was low across settings. Continued public education about UV risk and its relation to weather and the seasons is needed to promote the routine use of multiple forms of sun protection during outdoor activities in peak UV times, especially among males and adolescents. Findings also highlight the importance of considering activity demands of public spaces in shade planning to optimize sun protection during outdoor activities in public spaces.

Impact of personal genomic risk information on melanoma prevention behaviors and psychological outcomes: a randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: We evaluated the impact of personal melanoma genomic risk information on sun-related behaviors and psychological outcomes. METHODS: In this parallel group, open, randomized controlled trial, 1,025 Australians of European ancestry without melanoma and aged 18-69 years were recruited via the Medicare database (3% consent). Participants were randomized to the intervention (n = 513; saliva sample for genetic testing, personalized melanoma risk booklet based on a 40-variant polygenic risk score, telephone-based genetic counseling, educational booklet) or control (n = 512; educational booklet). Wrist-worn ultraviolet (UV) radiation dosimeters (10-day wear) and questionnaires were administered at baseline, 1 month postintervention, and 12 months postbaseline. RESULTS: At 12 months, 948 (92%) participants completed dosimetry and 973 (95%) the questionnaire. For the primary outcome, there was no effect of the genomic risk intervention on objectively measured UV exposure at 12 months, irrespective of traditional risk factors. For secondary outcomes at 12 months, the intervention reduced sunburns (risk ratio: 0.72, 95% confidence interval: 0.54-0.96), and increased skin examinations among women. Melanoma-related worry was reduced. There was no overall impact on general psychological distress. CONCLUSION: Personalized genomic risk information did not influence sun exposure patterns but did improve some skin cancer prevention and early detection behaviors, suggesting it may be useful for precision prevention. There was no evidence of psychological harm.

School-based interventions to improve sun-safe knowledge, attitudes and behaviors in childhood and adolescence: A systematic review.

Ultraviolet radiation exposure is the leading cause of skin cancer, and childhood and adolescence is a particularly susceptible life period for exposure. This systematic review assessed whether interventions in elementary and secondary school settings reduced sun exposure, sunburns, and development of melanocytic nevi, and improved sun-safe knowledge, attitudes and sun protection behaviors in childhood and adolescence. A systematic search up to June 2020 of MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane and ProQuest databases was undertaken, for studies conducted among students in an elementary or secondary school setting that compared an intervention group with a pre-intervention or separate control group. Data were summarized using qualitative synthesis. Pooled effects from meta-analysis with random effects were also reported where appropriate. Sixty-five studies were included (22 randomized, 43 non-randomized). Most studies assessed measures of sun-safe behaviors, knowledge and attitudes (57, 48 and 33 studies, respectively), and observed improved sun protection behaviors and sun-safe knowledge, whereas few studies reduced time in the sun. About half improved participants' attitudes towards tanning desirability. Sunburns and nevus counts were less frequently assessed, but about half of these studies observed a reduction. There was substantial heterogeneity for outcomes except attitudes towards the desirability of tanning (pooled odds ratio from 6 studies: 0.81, 95% confidence interval 0.70-0.94). Key positive intervention features included: elementary school settings, interactive features or multiple components, and incorporating social norm influences. Most studies were classified at high risk of bias. In conclusion, school-based sun-related interventions had positive impacts on behaviors and attitudes among elementary and secondary school children.

Prevalence of skin examination behaviours among Australians over time.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to examine the prevalence and correlates of opportunistic skin check behaviours among Australians and whether changes over time might explain increasing underlying rates of melanoma in situ. METHODS: The National Sun Protection Survey involved periodic telephone-based cross-sectional surveys during summer since 2003. Skin checks by a doctor in the past 12 months was asked in four summers over 2006-2017, and responses from 23,374 Australians aged 12-69 years were analysed. Prevalence estimates were weighted to be representative of the Australian population. Chi-square tests compared the prevalence over time and by characteristics. RESULTS: The overall proportion reporting whole-body skin checks in the past 12 months was 20 % in 2006-07 and 2010-11, 21 % in 2013-14, and 22 % in 2016-17; but increased from 29 % in 2006-07 to 37 % in 2016-17 for those aged 45-69 years (p < 0.0001). In 2016-17, 5% reported a skin check of part-body and 9% for a specific mole or spot. The proportion reporting no skin checks increased from 61 % to 64 % over time (p < 0.0001). Whole-body skin checks were more common among older respondents, females, and also varied by residence location, skin sensitivity, skin colour, risk perception, and socio-economic index (all p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Approximately one third of Australians had their skin checked by a doctor within a 12-month period, but this varied across population sub-groups. Skin check behaviours were relatively stable over time, with modest increases in the prevalence of skin checks for those aged 45-69 years. These findings do not explain underlying large increases in rates of melanoma in situ.

Concerns about vitamin D and sun exposure behaviour among Australians.

ISSUES ADDRESSED: Australians' concerns about vitamin D and influence on sun protection were last quantified a decade ago in Queensland amidst media attention on emerging evidence of non-skeletal benefits of vitamin D. Meanwhile these circumstances persist and impact is worth assessing. METHODS: Measures of concern about vitamin D were included in three recent population-based cross-sectional surveys of Australians' sun-related behaviours during summer months (2010-2011, 2013-2014 and 2016-2017). We analysed characteristics, beliefs and behaviours associated with vitamin D concerns regarding regular sunscreen use among adults in 2016-2017 (N = 3614). RESULTS: Concerns about vitamin D continued to persist among adults surveyed between 2010-2011 and 2016-2017. Vitamin D concerns regarding the sunscreen use were more common among women, older respondents and adults with skin that tans or is not susceptible to sunburn. Respondents concerned about vitamin D were more likely to exhibit pro-tanning beliefs, scepticism about sunscreen safety and have attempted a suntan. They were also less likely to use sun protection in everyday activities outdoors and less likely to use sunscreen on summer weekends. CONCLUSIONS: Vitamin D concerns related to sunscreen use remained common among Australian adults. Skin cancer control advocates may be reassured that those with the greatest skin cancer risk (burn only) were less likely to hold these concerns, while the related infrequent sun protection and tanning among concerned adults are problematic. SO WHAT?: Continued education and research is needed to ensure that the general public understand the risks and benefits of sun exposure in Australia.

Examining Health-Related Effects of Refurbishment to Parks in a Lower Socioeconomic Area: The ShadePlus Natural Experiment.

Degraded parks in disadvantaged areas are underutilized for recreation, which may impact long-term health. Using a natural experiment, we examined the effects of local government refurbishments to parks (n = 3 intervention; n = 3 comparison) in low socioeconomic areas (LSEA) of Melbourne on park use, health behavior, social engagement and psychological well-being. Amenities promoting physical activity and sun protection included walking paths, playground equipment and built shade. Outcomes were measured via systematic observations, and self-report surveys of park visitors over three years. The refurbishments significantly increased park use, while shade use increased only in parks with shade sails. A trend for increased social engagement was also detected. Findings infer improvement of quality, number and type of amenities in degraded parks can substantially increase park use in LSEA. Findings support provision of shade over well-designed playgrounds in future park refurbishments to enhance engagement and sun protection behavior. Further research should identify park amenities to increase physical activity.

Sun-protective clothing and shade use in public outdoor leisure settings from 1992 to 2019: Results from cross-sectional observational surveys in Melbourne, Australia.

Skin cancer presents a significant public health burden in Australia. The present study aimed to supplement population-based estimates of sun protection behaviour by examining setting-specific trends in directly observed sun protection in public outdoor leisure settings. Repeated cross-sectional observational surveys of adolescents and adults were conducted on summer weekends between 11 am and 3 pm from 1992 to 2002, 2006 to 2012, and 2018 to 2019 (N = 44,979) at pools/beaches and parks/gardens within 25 km of the centre of Melbourne, Victoria. The primary outcome was a binary index representing individuals having above or below the median level of body surface covered by hat, shirt, and leg garments in each setting type. The prevalence of above-median body coverage increased between 1992 and 2002 in both settings. At pools/beaches, a slight decline in above-median body coverage between 2006 and 2019 in males and females (adjusted odds ratio, AOR = 0.96 [0.94, 0.97]; 0.94 [0.93, 0.95]) appeared to be driven by a decline in leg coverage, while arm coverage, hat, sunglasses, and shade use remained stable. At parks/gardens, a decline in above-median body coverage between 2006 and 2019 (AOR = 0.90 [0.89, 0.91]; 0.94 [0.93, 0.95]) was accompanied by small declines across other protective behaviours that varied between males and females. Patterns in protective behaviours observed in outdoor leisure settings may reflect the changing composition of individuals choosing to remain outdoors during peak UV times and highlight the importance of continued promotion and monitoring of the use of multiple measures to protect against UV damage in Australia.

Teacher perceptions of sun protection practices in the secondary school setting: Barriers, enablers and recommendations for future.

OBJECTIVE: This qualitative study aimed to explore sun protection barriers and enablers in secondary schools in Victoria. METHODS: Five focus groups were conducted with nominated Health or Physical Education (PE) Coordinators (or other staff representatives) from schools in metropolitan and regional Victoria. Discussions were audio-recorded, transcribed and coded thematically. RESULTS: Participants identified the need for regulatory influences that included minimum standards for sun protection policy, training and shade in the built environment. Participants perceived that sun protection is not always acknowledged to be a duty of care in secondary schools. A crowded health and well-being curriculum, a focus on fostering independence, and challenges overcoming peer norms were perceived to be important contextual influences. At an organisational level, strong leadership and a united approach among staff were identified as critical ingredients for successful policy implementation and organisational change. Several potentially effective strategies were proposed, including increased shade, leveraging from student leaders, normalising sun protection practices and prioritising staff role modelling. CONCLUSIONS: A cultural shift is required for many schools to accept and act on sun protection as a duty of care. A comprehensive approach that includes regulatory action, healthy school policies and leading by example may help protect students and staff from harmful UV exposure during school hours. SO WHAT?: Without regulatory support, strong leadership is required to implement and enforce sun protection practices within schools. Health promotion programs could assist schools to trial and evaluate the sun protection strategies that involve student-led solutions, role modelling and increasing shade.

Implementation of the SunSmart program and population sun protection behaviour in Melbourne, Australia: Results from cross-sectional summer surveys from 1987 to 2017.

BACKGROUND: Australia has one of the highest skin cancer rates in the world. 'SunSmart' is a multi-component, internationally recognised community-wide skin cancer prevention program implemented in Melbourne, Australia, since summer 1988-1989. Following recent reductions in melanoma rates among younger Australian cohorts, the extent of behaviour change and the potential contribution of prevention programs to this decline in melanoma rates are of interest. Sun protection is a multifaceted behaviour. Measures previously applied to monitor change over time in preventive behaviour for this population focused on individual behaviours. The omission of multiple behaviours that reduce exposure to ultraviolet radiation (UV) may have led to underestimates of behaviour change, meriting further analysis of long-term trends to contribute to this debate. METHODS AND FINDINGS: A population-based survey was conducted in Melbourne in the summer before SunSmart commenced (1987-1988) and across summers in 3 subsequent decades (1988-2017). During summer months, residents (14-69 years) were recruited to cross-sectional weekly telephone interviews assessing their tanning attitudes, sun protection behaviour, and sunburn incidence on the weekend prior to interview. Quotas were used to ensure the sample was proportional to the population by age and sex, while younger respondents were oversampled in some years. The majority of the respondents reported their skin was susceptible to sunburn. Changes in sun protection behaviour were analysed for N = 13,285 respondents in multivariable models, cumulating surveys within decades (1987-1988: N = 1,655; 1990s: N = 5,258; 2000s: N = 3,385; 2010s: N = 2,987) and adjusting for relevant ambient weather conditions and UV levels on weekend dates. We analysed specific and composite behaviours including a novel analysis of the use of maximal sun protection, which considered those people who stayed indoors during peak UV hours together with those people well-protected when outdoors. From a low base, use of sun protection increased rapidly in the decade after SunSmart commenced. The odds of use of at least 1 sun protection behaviours on summer weekends was 3 times higher in the 1990s than pre-SunSmart (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 3.04, 95% CI 2.52-3.68, p < 0.001). There was a smaller increase in use of maximal sun protection including shade (AOR = 1.68, 95% CI 1.44-1.97, p < 0.001). These improvements were sustained into the 2000s and continued to increase in the 2010s. Inferences about program effects are limited by the self-reported data, the absence of a control population, the cross-sectional study design, and the fact that the survey was not conducted in all years. Other potential confounders may include increasing educational attainment among respondents over time and exposure to other campaigns such as tobacco and obesity prevention. CONCLUSIONS: With an estimated 20-year lag between sun exposure and melanoma incidence, our findings are consistent with SunSmart having contributed to the reduction in melanoma among younger cohorts.

Not part of my routine: a qualitative study of use and understanding of UV forecast information and the SunSmart app.

BACKGROUND: The Ultraviolet (UV) Index provides a reliable means of monitoring the strength of UV radiation at the Earth's surface, which can be used to indicate the potential for skin damage. This qualitative study aims to examine public understanding of the UV Index among Australians who routinely use UV forecast information as well as those who do not. METHODS: Recent use of the SunSmart app (a popular mobile and tablet app that provides UV forecast information) served as a proxy for use of UV forecast information. Six focus groups were conducted with 'new users', who trialled the SunSmart app for the first time in the two weeks preceding the group discussion. In addition, 15 in-depth interviews were conducted with 'existing users', who routinely used the SunSmart app. Thematic discourse analysis was undertaken to compare views and experiences. RESULTS: Misperceptions about UV radiation were common. Participants learnt new information about UV radiation, the UV Index, and the times of the day that sun protection is recommended. Among adults who were using UV forecast information for the first time, this learning rarely translated to new behaviours; for these participants, the UV Index forecast information and recommendations were inconsistent with their own observation of the weather and subsequent judgement about their propensity to burn. Thus new users considered the UV forecast information to be overly cautious. In contrast, existing users recognised their inability to judge the UV Index level; for these participants, UV forecast information provided by the SunSmart app was incorporated into their daily routines and used to inform their sun protection behaviours. CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS: No matter how broadly UV forecast information is promoted, it is unlikely to improve sun protection behaviours across the Victorian population due to the low level of basic understanding of UV radiation. Public education strategies that correct the commonly held misperception that temperature and/or sunshine can reliably predict the potential for UV damage are required. Improved public awareness about UV radiation and how the UV Index can be used to prevent skin cancer may help Australians to develop more effective sun protection habits.

Risk attitudes and sun protection behaviour: Can behaviour be altered by using a melanoma genomic risk intervention?

BACKGROUND: Exposure to ultraviolet radiation from sunlight is directly associated with melanoma skin cancer, however reducing sun-exposure can be difficult to achieve at a population level. METHODS: Using a genomic risk information behaviour change trial for melanoma prevention, we classified participants as risk-seeking, risk-neutral or risk-averse for domain-specific risk taking (DOSPERT). One-way ANOVA determined the association between socio-demographic characteristics and risk-taking score, and multivariable linear regression ascertained impact of an individual's underlying risk propensity on an objective measure of sun-exposure, standard erythemal dose (SED), at 3-months follow-up. RESULTS: Of 119 participants, mean age 53 years; 50% males, 87% had a personal/family history of cancer; 19% were classified risk-seeking, 57% risk-neutral. The mean risk-taking score was significantly higher in younger participants (≤50 years: 13.86 vs. >50 years: 11.11, p = 0.003); and lower in those with a personal/family history of skin cancer versus without (10.55 vs 13.33, p = 0.009). Risk averse individuals had lower weekly mean SEDs at 3-months than risk neutral and risk seeking individuals (2.56, 5.81, 4.81 respectively, p = 0.01). Risk seekers showed fewer sun protective habits (p < 0.001); and higher intentional tanning, (p = 0.01). At 3-months, risk seekers attained 16%-54% lower SEDs in the genomic information group compared with controls, however this was not significantly different across risk groups (interaction p = 0.13). CONCLUSION: An individual's underlying risk attitude is likely associated with sun-exposure behaviours, and may modify the effect of a genomic risk information behaviour change intervention. Young people and risk seekers may benefit most from being given information on their genetic risk of melanoma.

The melanoma genomics managing your risk study: A protocol for a randomized controlled trial evaluating the impact of personal genomic risk information on skin cancer prevention behaviors.

BACKGROUND: Reducing ultraviolet radiation (UV) exposure and improving early detection may reduce melanoma incidence, mortality and health system costs. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of providing information on personal genomic risk of melanoma in reducing UV exposure at 12 months, according to low and high traditional risk. METHODS: In this randomized controlled trial, participants (target sample = 892) will be recruited from the general population, and randomized (1:1 ratio, intervention versus control). Intervention arm participants provide a saliva sample, receive personalized melanoma genomic risk information, a genetic counselor phone call, and an educational booklet on melanoma prevention. Control arm participants receive only the educational booklet. Eligible participants are aged 18-69 years, have European ancestry and no personal history of melanoma. All participants will complete a questionnaire and wear a UV dosimeter to objectively measure their sun exposure at baseline, 1- and 12-month time-points, except 1-month UV dosimetry will be limited to ~250 participants. The primary outcome is total daily Standard Erythemal Doses at 12 months. Secondary outcomes include objectively measured UV exposure for specific time periods (e.g. midday hours), self-reported sun protection and skin-examination behaviors, psycho-social outcomes, and ethical considerations surrounding offering genomic testing at a population level. A within-trial and modelled economic evaluation will be undertaken from an Australian health system perspective to assess the intervention costs and outcomes. DISCUSSION: This trial will inform the clinical and personal utility of introducing genomic testing into the health system for melanoma prevention and early detection at a population-level. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12617000691347.

Validation of Questionnaire and Diary Measures of Time Outdoors Against an Objective Measure of Personal Ultraviolet Radiation Exposure.

Self-reported sun exposure is commonly measured using questionnaires or diaries, but there are limited data on their validity, particularly for population subgroups. This research aimed to compare self-reported sun exposure, measured as (1) habitual time outdoors over the past month on weekends and weekdays and (2) a 4-day diary measure, against objective measurement of personal ultraviolet radiation using polysulfone film dosimeters. From November 2015 to January 2016, 94 people (22-69 years and living in New South Wales, Australia) completed a questionnaire, 4-day diary and 4-day dosimeter measures of overall, weekday and weekend sun exposure. Spearman correlations and Bland-Altman plots were used to measure agreement. The overall weekly correlation was 0.57 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.44, 0.68) between standard erythemal doses (SEDs) measured by dosimeter and time spent outdoors measured by questionnaire, 0.74 (95% CI 0.66-0.81) between dosimeter and diary, and 0.59 (95% CI 0.48-0.68) between questionnaire and diary measures. Validity was lower for younger people and weekend sun exposure. There was strong correlation between dosimeter and sun diary measures and moderate correlation between dosimeter and questionnaire measures. Daily measurement over a longer period may be required to accurately capture weeklong sun exposure in all population subgroups.

Skin cancer history, sun-related attitudes, behaviour and sunburn among renal transplant recipients versus general population.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Renal transplant recipients (RTR) have both an excessive skin cancer incidence and a high mortality rate. In Australia RTR receive extensive public education on skin cancer and many undergo further education pre/post-transplant. This study examines whether RTR have sufficiently rigorous sun protection behaviour compared with the general population. METHODS: Altogether 179 RTR from two large Melbourne hospitals involving skin clinic teams in patient care were recruited to undergo cross-sectional telephone interviews. Comparisons were made with residents (25-69 years) surveyed using equivalent measures and methods in adjacent summers (2006-2007, n = 904; 2010-2011, n = 942) for regular population monitoring surveys. Multivariate analyses of weekend behaviour were adjusted for related ambient temperature records. RESULTS: RTR were more compliant with sun protection behaviour on the weekend prior to interview than the residents surveyed. For example, for 2006-2007 and 2010-2011, the odds ratio and confidence intervals (CI 95%) were respectively: used sunscreen: 2.0 (1.1-3.8) and 2.8 (1.4-5.3); wore a long-sleeved top: 4.5 (2.4-8.5) and 3.6 (1.9-7.0). RTR sunburn prevalence (5%) appeared similar to that of residents (odds ratios comparing 2006-2007 and 2010-2011 0.6 [95% CI, 0.2-1.6] and 0.7 [95% CI, 0.3-1.9]). Despite generally good sun protection behaviour, many RTR (47%) had skin cancers treated. CONCLUSION: The intensive education of RTR may have contributed to their better sun protection. Some RTR with excessive exposure to UV radiation introduction of may benefit from implementation of further photoprotection strategies. These findings may be particularly relevant to other RTR groups receiving education about sun protection.

Shade Sails and Passive Recreation in Public Parks of Melbourne and Denver: A Randomized Intervention.

OBJECTIVES: To test whether shade sails will increase the use of passive recreation areas (PRAs). METHODS: We conducted a stratified randomized pretest-posttest controlled design study in Melbourne, Australia, and Denver, Colorado, in 2010 to 2014. We randomized a sample of 144 public parks with 2 PRAs in full sun in a 1:3 ratio to treatment or control. Shade sails were built at 1 PRA per treatment park. The outcome was any use of the study PRA (n = 576 pretest and n = 576 posttest observations; 100% follow-up). RESULTS: Compared with control PRAs (adjusted probability of use: pretest = 0.14, posttest = 0.17), use of treatment PRAs (pretest = 0.10, posttest = 0.32) was higher at posttest (odds ratio [OR] = 3.91; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.71, 8.94). Shade increased use of PRAs in Denver (control: pretest = 0.18, posttest = 0.19; treatment: pretest = 0.16, posttest = 0.47) more than Melbourne (control: pretest = 0.11, posttest = 0.14; shaded: pretest = 0.06, posttest = 0.19; OR = 2.98; 95% CI = 1.09, 8.14). CONCLUSIONS: Public investment in shade is warranted for skin cancer prevention and may be especially useful in the United States. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT02971709.

Rationale, design, and baseline data of a cross-national randomized trial on the effect of built shade in public parks for sun protection.

Environments can be structured to reduce solar ultraviolet radiation (UV) exposure to prevent skin cancer. A prospective randomized trial is being conducted to test whether introducing shade sails in passive recreation areas (PRAs) in public parks will increase use and decrease UV exposure in the shaded compared to unshaded PRAs. Shade effects will be compared between Melbourne, Australia and Denver, USA. The trial enrolled 145 public parks with PRAs suitable for shade construction and randomized parks to intervention or control in a 1:3 ratio. Use of PRAs and UV levels were recorded at each park by trained observers during 30-minute periods on four weekend days in each of two summers (pretest and posttest). Shade sails were constructed between the summers. Given low numbers of users at pretest, the outcome measure was modified to use of the PRA (use vs. no use) and unit of analysis to the individual observation. Observations (n=580) occurred on average 29days from the summer solstice and 55min from solar noon in warm weather (mean=26.2°C) with some cloud cover but only slight or no wind. Typically, PRAs had benches and picnic tables and were located near playgrounds. PRAs were in use during 13.3% of observations (mean=0.41 users). UV over 30-minutes at the PRA boundary (mean=3.2 standard erythemal dose [SED]) and center (mean=3.3 SED) was high. Shade for skin cancer prevention has been understudied. This study will address this gap by determining whether purpose-built shade structures promote greater use of shaded areas within public parks.

A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial of the Feasibility, Acceptability, and Impact of Giving Information on Personalized Genomic Risk of Melanoma to the Public.

BACKGROUND: Communication of personalized melanoma genomic risk information may improve melanoma prevention behaviors. METHODS: We evaluated the feasibility and acceptability of communicating personalized genomic risk of melanoma to the public and its preliminary impact on behaviors and psychosocial outcomes. One hundred eighteen people aged 22 to 69 years provided a saliva sample and were randomized to the control (nonpersonalized educational materials) or intervention (personalized booklet presenting melanoma genomic risk as absolute and relative risks and a risk category based on variants in 21 genes, telephone-based genetic counseling, and nonpersonalized educational materials). Intention-to-treat analyses overall and by-risk category were conducted using ANCOVA adjusted for baseline values. RESULTS: Consent to participate was 41%, 99% were successfully genotyped, and 92% completed 3-month follow-up. Intervention participants reported high satisfaction with the personalized booklet (mean = 8.6, SD = 1.6; on a 0-10 scale) and genetic counseling (mean = 8.1, SD = 2.2). No significant behavioral effects at 3-month follow-up were identified between intervention and control groups overall: objectively measured standard erythemal doses per day [-16%; 95% confidence interval (CI), -43% to 24%] and sun protection index (0.05; 95% CI, -0.07 to 0.18). There was increased confidence identifying melanoma at 3 months (0.40; 95% CI, 0.10-0.69). Stratified by risk category, effect sizes for intentional tanning and some individual sun protection items appeared stronger for the average-risk group. There were no appreciable group differences in skin cancer-related worry or psychologic distress. CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate feasibility and acceptability of providing personalized genomic risk of melanoma to the public. IMPACT: Genomic risk information has potential as a melanoma prevention strategy. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 26(2); 212-21. ©2016 AACR.