Browsed by
Tag: Ultraviolet Radiation

Perceived Costs and Rewards of Sun Protection among High School Students

Perceived Costs and Rewards of Sun Protection among High School Students

Adolescents frequently engage in behaviors that increase ultraviolet radiation (UVR) exposure, elevating their lifetime risk for skin cancer. Project Shine examined cross-sectional associations between high school students’ perceptions of the costs of UVR protection, the rewards of tanning, and their engagement in UVR-protective behaviors to identify opportunities for intervention.

New findings from this study have been published in Cancer Epidemiology. Biomarkers, and Prevention, a journal of the American Association for Cancer Research. The project was led by Dr. Yelena Wu from the Huntsman Cancer Institute at the University of Utah. Dr. David Buller from Klein Buendel was a member of the multi-institutional team.

Data were analyzed from 2,105 students (46% male; 77% White; and 33.4% rural) at baseline who enrolled in the Sun-safe Habits Intervention and Education cluster-randomized trial conducted in Utah high schools from 2021 to 2023. Students completed self-reports of skin cancer prevention knowledge, time spent outdoors, perceived costs of UVR protection, perceived rewards of tanning, and UVR-protective behaviors. Analyses included bivariate tests and multivariable regression, adjusted for demographics and knowledge.

Methods, analyses, and findings are described in detail in the Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers, and Prevention publication. In summary, students who perceived higher costs of UVR protection and greater rewards of tanning engaged in fewer UVR-protective behaviors. In an adjusted model, lower sun-safe behavior was independently predicted by lower knowledge of UVR safety, higher perceived protection cost, and greater tanning reward. Perceived costs of UVR protection and appearance-based rewards of tanning are key attributes of adolescent UVR exposure.

The authors suggest that school-based skin cancer prevention should incorporate appearance-focused and tailored strategies (such as UV photography or photoaging feedback) to promote sustainable sun safety behaviors. Addressing both cognitive and motivational barriers to UVR protection during adolescence could strengthen early prevention efforts and reduce future skin cancer burden.

This research was supported by a grant from the National Cancer Institute (CA244674; Dr. Yelena Wu, Principal Investigator). Co-authors include Omar Anwar, Marcelo Sleiman, Jr., Muriel Statman, and Dr. Kenneth Tercyak from the Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center at Georgetown University; Dr. Tammy Stump, Dr. Jakob Jensen, Dr. Douglas Grossman, Dr. Jincheng Shen, and Dr. Benjamin Haaland from the Huntsman Cancer Institute at the University of Utah; Dr. Jennifer Hay from Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York; and Dr. David Buller from Klein Buendel. Support was also provided by Georgetown University, the University of Utah, and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center.

Evaluation of Go Sun Smart Georgia

Evaluation of Go Sun Smart Georgia

The evaluation results of a workplace sun safety research project were presented at the 18th Annual Conference on the Science of Dissemination and Implementation in Health held December 14-17, 2025, in Washington, DC. Dr. Cam Escoffery from Emory University was the presenting author. The presentation complemented the conference theme of “Realizing the Benefits of Dissemination & Implementation Science.”

African American and Hispanic workers face unique skin cancer risks and are underrepresented in sun safety intervention research. To support sun safety practice in occupational settings with racially/ethnically heterogeneous populations, we adapted an evidence-based sun safety program—Go Sun Smart Georgia (GSSG)—to better serve African American and Hispanic outdoor workers and evaluated it in local governments. Program implementation outcomes are described.

The study enrolled seven local public employers in Georgia in 2024 and randomly assigned them to intervention (3 sites) or delayed intervention (comparison) group (4 sites), stratified by government type (municipal/county) and size (≥100/<100 employees). GSSG included training of peer coaches; written audit of the employers’ sun safety policies and practices; 45-minute online employee training; and a resource website. Program materials were adapted with culturally relevant language and imagery. GSSG was delivered over a four-month period in June-October. Implementation outcomes were collected via surveys and implementation logs: GSSG delivery, worksite sun safety policy adoption or modification, skin cancer and heat illness prevention practice use and penetration, and GSSG acceptability.

Two county governments and five municipalities (3 large, 2 small) in Southwest/East Georgia participated and 48 managers and 156 outdoor workers were assessed. Compared to the comparison group, outdoor workers in the intervention worksites had higher level of information about UV and heat protective behaviors; more workers recalled receiving skin cancer and heat training; and more reported sharing sun safety information from work at home. Uptake of GSSG policy components was slow; no sites requested a policy audit, one requested a model sun safety policy. Both managers and outdoor workers rated GSSG materials highly (an average of 4.29 out of 5 stars).

The adapted GSSG was well received and improved knowledge and sharing of sun safety practices among outdoor workers. Systematic adaptation of effective interventions for novel populations is important for increasing reach and impact of evidence in sun safety interventions and addressing disparities in cancer prevention.

This research was supported by a grant (U48DP006377) from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to the Emory University Prevention Research Center (Dr. Alex Morshed from Emory University and Dr. David Buller from Klein Buendel, Multiple Principal Investigators). Additional authors on the poster presentation included Mary Buller, Dr. Barbara Walkosz, and Irene Adjei from Klein Buendel; and Dr. Cam Escoffery, Helen Singer, April Hermstad, and Dr. Regine Haardörfer from Emory University. 

Helps and hindrances to passing state indoor tanning laws

Helps and hindrances to passing state indoor tanning laws

Indoor tanning causes skin cancers, including potentially deadly melanoma. Indoor tanning often starts during youth, a critical time for deleterious skin damage. About half of U.S. states have enacted laws banning indoor tanning for minors under the age of 18. A multi-institutional team of researchers including Dr. David Buller and Julia Berteletti from Klein Buendel has published a paper in Translational Behavioral Medicine that reports qualitative findings from interviews with key informants involved in indoor tanning legislative efforts to identify/describe factors influencing law enactment, based on the Multiple Streams Framework (1).

Guided by expert advisors and using snowball-sampling, 64 key informants from 16 states with most recently enacted indoor tanning laws regulating minor access and states without restrictions were contacted. In virtual interviews, key informants shared their unique “story” of indoor tanning bill efforts, enactment, implementation, impact, and potential future directions, which were transcribed and qualitatively coded by trained staff.

Although key informant roles (legislators, advocates, clinicians, and melanoma survivors) and legislative processes vary by state, similar facilitators and barriers to indoor tanning bill passage were identified: personal stories, advocacy, opposition, preparation, legislator education, economic/ enforcement issues, bill stringency, political values/partisanship, and legislative process. Other factors influencing bill enaction included failed U.S. Food and Drug Administration attempts toward federally banning minor indoor tanning and competing priorities.

Despite evidence of laws’ impact on minors’ indoor tanning, policy enaction is challenging and slow. Understanding key facilitators and barriers may help advocates to advance legislation efforts. Advocating for stringent laws necessitates consideration of potential downstream effects. For example, even with policy enactment, key informants believed enforcement and compliance were likely insufficient and variable, with minors continuing to indoor tan, putting them at risk for potentially deadly skin cancer.

This research was supported by a grant to Rutgers University from the National Cancer Institute (CA244370; Dr. Carolyn Heckman and Dr. David Buller, Multiple Principal Investigators). Authors include Dr. Carolyn Heckman, Ms. Anna Mitarotondo, Mr. Kevin Schroth, and Dr. Shawna Hudson from Rutgers University; Dr. Jerod Stapleton from the University of Kentucky; Dr. Robert Dellavalle from the University of Minnesota; Dr. Sophie Balk from the Albert Einstein College of Medicine; and Dr. David Buller and Ms. Julia Berteletti from Klein Buendel.

References

  1. Kingdon JW. Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. Longman, 2003.