The best design in the described scenario is an observational case-control study. It begins with the outcome, which would be lung cancer, and works backward to determine probable causes (such as air pollution exposure from coal burning). A control group is established as those without lung cancer and not affected by any other external factor that may cause the disease. For example, smokers or patients with types of cancers that may spread should not be included.
Exposure can be measured by setting up stations in the area around the station, in both urban and suburban communities. Using a variety of techniques including automatic monitoring, diffusion tubes, dust frisbee, dosimeter system, and particle monitor. Airborne pollutants that are pertinent to coal plants are sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and particulate matter as well as trace metals including radioactive mercury and radon that have been associated with coal burning, too (Greenpeace, 2016).
Measuring these will help determine the physiological effects that may stem from these pollutants and potentially cause lung cancer. The examination of the participants should be regular and should occur for six months because this timeframe allows making reliable conclusions related to the presence of the indicated substances in the participants’ organisms. Since the addressed type of exposure is rather complicated in terms of tracing all the possible substances associated with it, three particular ones can be chosen for monitoring: sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and particulate matter.
Age will not be among the inclusion criteria of the study; however, particular attention will be paid to young children for two reasons: first, greater risks for their health are associated with the exposure, and second, they are more susceptible to being exposed to air pollution because of their greater air intake per kilogram of body weight (Agency for Toxic Substances & Disease Registry, 2016); therefore, they may display the presence of high-level exposure earlier than adults.
The concept of environmental justice (EJ) is an important consideration in the study, and EJ can potentially modify the research perspectives and approaches. In this context, it is recognized that there are vulnerable groups in which people experience negative effects of certain environmental issues to a greater extent than people in other groups (Hilmers, Hilmers, & Dave, 2012). The reasons for inequality maybe income, culture, or other factors that shape people’s lifestyles and living conditions.
In the presented case, it can be observed that many people chose to live near a coal fire station because their financial situations had not allowed them to find a safer place; however, many of them may have understood that health risks were associated with this choice. Therefore, one of the considerations that can be incorporated in the study is evaluating people’s backgrounds to establish the characteristics that made them a vulnerable group to which the burdens of environmental issues are not distributed fairly.
References
Agency for Toxic Substances & Disease Registry. (2016). Principles of pediatric environmental health: Why are children often especially susceptible to the adverse effects of environmental toxicants? Web.
Greenpeace. (2016). Air pollution from coal power plants. Web.
Hilmers, A., Hilmers, D. C., & Dave, J. (2012). Neighborhood disparities in access to healthy foods and their effects on environmental justice. American Journal of Public Health, 102(9), 1644-1654.