Children, OnlyHCESNCT03319927

Reducing Pesticide Exposures in Child Care Centers

A study testing Changes in pesticide exposure, IPM Practices and Educational Workshops in people with Children, Only and Risk Reduction, run by University of California, San Francisco at 1 site in United States.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record

Search all trials

Trial summary

A randomized control study was conducted to reduce the exposure to pesticides in child care centers. A 7-month child care health consultant-led integrated pest management (IPM) intervention was conducted in 85 child care centers serving preschool-age children in five California counties. Read more about this study

Who is it for?: Ages 3 to 75 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
Conditions the study is for: Children, Only, Risk Reduction, Environmental Exposure
What is being tested?: Changes in pesticide exposure, IPM Practices and Educational Workshops
Type of treatment: Lifestyle or therapy programme
Could I receive a placebo?: No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people: 987 participants
Where: 1 siteUnited States
Study dates: 9 Oct 2017to 1 Aug 2024
Phase: Interventional
Are there results?: Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

Ages 3 to 75 years
All sexes
Healthy volunteers accepted
Child, Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

The centers must meet the following criteria:
Be a licensed child care center with a child care director who speaks English
Used pesticides (i.e., baits or sprays) in the last year
Operated for at least two years with no plans to close in the next 12 months
Enroll children between three to five years of age of diverse ethnic and racial backgrounds
Have at least 25% of enrolled children receiving a government subsidy (e.g., Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP), Head Start, Child Care Development Fund, Alternative Payment program).

Show all 18Show fewer

Have a carpet or couch on-site.
The child care providers must meet the following criteria:
Work in the participating child care centers
Work in the classroom of the participating children
Work at least 30 hours a week
Plan to work at the center over the next 9 months
The families must have a preschool-age child enrolled in the participating child care center and meet the following criteria:
Three or four years of age
The child spends at least six hours per day in the center
Will be enrolled in the center for the next nine months
Has a parent present during enrollment who speaks either English or Spanish
Parents will complete surveys or interviews in English or Spanish in the Fall and Spring

Who cannot join

Centers that participated in an IPM intervention and training project
Families that have children who have special health care needs or disabilities who can not participate in physical activity at the child care center.
Center directors who do not read and write in English.
Child care providers who do not read and write in English.

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

United States1 site

University of California, San Francisco
San Francisco, California, 94143

Other trials in United States

About this study

Official title: Reducing Pesticide Exposures to Preschool-age Children in California Child Care Centers

Read the detailed description

The goal of the study was to reduce children's exposure to pesticides in child care centers to improve their long-term health. A randomized-control trial in five northern California counties compared changes in director's IPM knowledge and self-efficacy, written IPM policies, IPM practices, number of pests and concentration of pesticides between child care centers assigned to an IPM intervention versus an attention control intervention on physical activity. Eighty-five child care center directors working in centers serving preschool-age children were enrolled. The child care health consultant-led intervention included an educational workshop, materials and tools, and center-specific consultation over seven months. In addition, the study included novel methods of measuring pesticide concentrations in child care centers (dust) and individual children (silicone wristbands). The study aims were to determine if an IPM intervention (1) increases child care center's director's IPM knowledge and self-efficacy, (2) improves center's IPM practices and policies, (3) reduces the number of pests present, (5) reduces pesticide exposures in child care center environments in the intervention IPM child care centers compared to the control centers.

Conditions: Children, Only, Risk Reduction, Environmental Exposure
Being tested: Changes in pesticide exposure, IPM Practices, Educational Workshops
Keywords: integrated pest management, environmental health, child care, preschool children, pesticides
Medical subject headings: Risk Reduction Behavior

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

Changes in pesticide exposureBehavioural
Also called Child care health consultant assessment and intervention
In the IPM centers the child care health consultant reviews the IPM baseline assessments and provides 7 monthly consultation visits to decrease the centers exposure to pesticides. Pre- and post- carpet dust samples and children's individual silicone wristbands are collected to identify changes in pesticide detection limits and concentrations at the child care center-level in both the IPM and PA centers pre- and post-intervention.
IPM PracticesBehavioural
In the IPM centers, a research assistant completed the IPM Checklist which identifies the IPM practices that the center meets and doesn't meet. The child care health consultant reviews the IPM Checklist findings with the child care center director after the baseline Checklist is completed. The IPM Checklist is completed pre- and post-intervention in the IPM and PA centers. The post-intervention IPM Checklist findings are compared to the baseline IPM Checklist findings to identify changes in IPM practices in both the IPM and PA centers.
Educational WorkshopsBehavioural
The IPM center directors and providers attend an IPM workshop and complete a survey to assess their knowledge of IPM practices pre- and post-workshop. The level of knowledge change is assessed by comparing the number of correct responses on the post-workshop survey compared to the pre-workshop survey.

Study groups in NCT03319927
Study group	Role	What they receive
Integrated pest management	Experimental	The intervention consists of an integrated pest management (IPM) educational workshop, providing IPM materials, and monthly consultation. The child care health consultants (CCHCs) conduct the educational workshop for child care center directors and providers on IPM practices including the providers' practices and beliefs. The workshop includes a slide presentation on pesticides and IPM practices and the directors receive an IPM Toolkit and IPM toolbox. After the workshop and baseline measures are completed, the CCHCs meet with center directors to review the results of the baseline observational Checklists and the directors identify center-specific intervention goals. Monthly child care health consultation visits are conducted with the director to review the center's progress towards the goals, discuss problems, and share resources. Receives: Behavioral: Changes in pesticide exposure; Behavioral: IPM Practices; Behavioral: Educational Workshops
Physical activity	Active comparator	The attention control group is given an intervention covering physical activity (PA) for preschool-age children in child care centers. The PA intervention includes the same intensity as the IPM intervention provided by a child care health consultant (CCHC). The CCHC conducts a workshop on physical activity that includes a slide presentation and the directors receive a Physical Activity Toolkit and toolbox. After the workshop and baseline measures are completed, the CCHCs meet with center directors to review the results of the baseline observational Checklists and the directors identify center-specific intervention goals. Monthly child care health consultation visits are conducted with the director to review the center's progress towards the goals, discuss problems, and share resources. Receives: Behavioral: Changes in pesticide exposure; Behavioral: IPM Practices

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

Decrease in Child Care Center Pesticides
Change in the levels of pesticide exposures collected in carpet dust samples in the child care centers from baseline to 9 months later. Pesticides are summarized as geometric mean concentration (ng/g) and then the log10 is applied to the data. Carpet dust samples were collected in each child care center at pre-intervention and post-intervention. A decrease in pesticide concentration from pre-intervention to post-intervention is represented as a negative value. A negative change score would be a positive finding with a decrease in pesticide concentration post-intervention.
Measured: Pre-intervention, 9 months after the workshop
Decrease in Children's Exposure to Pesticides
Change in the levels of pesticide exposures collected in personal silicone wristbands worn by 3 to 5 of the preschool-age children in each child care center. They wore the wristbands for ~30 hours pre-intervention/baseline and 9 months later. Pesticides are summarized as geometric mean concentration (ng/mL) and then log10 is applied to the data. A decrease in pesticide concentration from pre-intervention to post-intervention is represented as a negative value. A negative change score would be a positive finding with a decrease in pesticide concentration post-intervention.
Measured: Pre-intervention and 9 months later (post-intervention)
Increase in Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Practices
The IPM practices were measured objectively with a standardized IPM Checklist during a 2-hour observational assessment at baseline/pre-intervention and then 9 months later using a standardized measure (Alkon etal, JPHC, 2016). The IPM practices observed included having garbage cans with liners and lids, using bait stations if there are pests, having window screens with no holes, no water leaks, and outside garbage bins on cement surfaces. Each item on the Checklist is marked as 1 (yes) or O (no). The mean ranged from 0 (no practices observed) to 1 (all of the items were observed). An increase in IPM practices would be positive change in the mean score post-intervention compared to pre-intervention.
Measured: Pre-Intervention and 9 months later

Secondary outcomes (3)

Decrease in the Presence of Pests
The # of pests were observed as part of the IPM Checklist assessment in different places in the child care center: kitchen, outside garbage area, playground, landscape outdoor area, and classroom at the pre-intervention period and 9 months later. Pre- and post-intervention, the # of pests observed is a number on a scale of 0 to infinity. A positive outcome would be a negative change score showing be a decrease in the # of pests observed post-intervention compared to pre-intervention.
Measured: Pre-intervention and 9 months later
Director's Self-Efficacy
The director's sense of self-efficacy provides information about their sense of control of their work environment and impact on the families and children that they serve. The intervention is designed to help the director's feel empowered (e.g., increase in self-efficacy) to make changes in their work environment and provide a healthy environment for children and families served in their center. The Self-Efficacy survey was modified from a standardized measure by Bandura, A (1977) to fit the intervention and child care center's environments. There are 8 items with responses rated on a likert scale from 1 to 4 as strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (4). Mean self-efficacy scores were calculated for each director. The minimum and maximum mean scores were 2.8 to 4.0. Higher mean score shows higher self-efficacy.
Measured: The Self-Efficacy Survey is completed by the directors pre-intervention and after the intervention (7 to 9 months later).
Number of Child Care Centers With Written IPM Policies
The presence of IPM policies was reviewed as (1 for "Yes") and (0 for "No") no both pre- and post-intervention in the IPM centers. Licensed child care centers are required to have written policies, but a specific policy on IPM is not required. Policies provide best practices for the child care administrators, providers and parents to follow when working or spending time in the center.
Measured: 9 months

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

9 Oct 20171 Aug 2024

First posted24 Oct 2017
Study start9 Oct 2017
Primary completion1 Aug 2024
Study completion1 Aug 2024

Resources

Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
Publications (5)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
Other trials for Children, OnlyStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
More trials run by University of California, San FranciscoThe sponsor's other registered studies.
What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design

Study type: Interventional
Phase: Phase N/A
Primary purpose: Prevention
Allocation: Randomised
Intervention model: Parallel groups
Model description: This randomized control study included 85 child care centers in five CA counties and was conducted in 9-month cycles over six years. The counties were matched and randomized to the intervention group (integrated pest management) or attention control group (physical activity). Each study cycle included Recruitment, Baseline Assessments, Intervention, and Post-Intervention Assessments. Baseline Assessments were completed as director interviews and surveys, child care provider surveys, research assistant-completed objective observations using standardized Checklist, center dust samples to measure pesticides, and silicone wristband personal samplers worn by 5 children per center for 30 hours. During the 7-month Intervention phase, CCHCs conducted one workshop per center on the intervention topic (IPM or physical activity) and provided monthly consultations with the center directors. The Post-Intervention stage repeated all the baseline assessments.
Masking: None (open label)
Enrolment: 987 participants (actual)

IDs, dates and publications

ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT03319927
Sponsor's protocol ID: 4000 317004 130129A 01 44
Other IDs: R01ES027134
Acronym: HCES
Status last verified: Jan 2026
First submitted: 12 Oct 2017
Last updated: 17 Feb 2026
Results posted: Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
Data monitoring committee: No
FDA-regulated drug: No
FDA-regulated device: No
Individual data sharing: No

Publications

Alkon A, Nouredini S, Swartz A, Sutherland AM, Stephens M, Davidson NA, Rose R. Integrated Pest Management Intervention in Child Care Centers Improves Knowledge, Pest Control, and Practices. J Pediatr Health Care. 2016 Nov-Dec;30(6):e27-e41. doi: 10.1016/j.pedhc.2016.07.004. Epub 2016 Aug 20.
PubMed 27553118
Bradman, A, Gasper, F, Castorina, R, Tong-Lin, E, McKone, T, & Maddelena, R. (2012). Environmental exposures in early childhood education environments (Agreement Number 08-305). Retrieved from Berkeley, CA:
Vidi PA, Anderson KA, Chen H, Anderson R, Salvador-Moreno N, Mora DC, Poutasse C, Laurienti PJ, Daniel SS, Arcury TA. Personal samplers of bioavailable pesticides integrated with a hair follicle assay of DNA damage to assess environmental exposures and their associated risks in children. Mutat Res Genet Toxicol Environ Mutagen. 2017 Oct;822:27-33. doi: 10.1016/j.mrgentox.2017.07.003. Epub 2017 Jul 16.
PubMed 28844239
Alkon A, Gunier RB, Hazard K, Castorina R, Hoffman PD, Scott RP, Anderson KA, Bradman A. Preschool-Age Children's Pesticide Exposures in Child Care Centers and at Home in Northern California. J Pediatr Health Care. 2022 Jan-Feb;36(1):34-45. doi: 10.1016/j.pedhc.2021.09.004. Epub 2021 Oct 8.
PubMed 34629233
Hazard K, Alkon A, Gunier RB, Castorina R, Camann D, Quarderer S, Bradman A. Predictors of pesticide levels in carpet dust collected from child care centers in Northern California, USA. J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol. 2024 Mar;34(2):229-240. doi: 10.1038/s41370-022-00516-8.
PubMed 36599924

Want to know more?

The sponsor has not listed a contact. The official record may have more details.

Talk to your doctor first and take this page with you. Only the study team can confirm whether you can join.

Questions to ask the study team

What is the study trying to find out?
What would I need to do, and how often would I visit?
Could I receive a placebo instead of the treatment?
What are the possible risks and benefits for me?
Will it cost me anything? Are travel or time paid for?
Can I keep seeing my own doctor during the study?
What happens when the study ends?

See locations

RecruitingPhase 4
A Study to Provide Continued Access to Study Drug to Children and Adolescents Who Have Completed Clinical Studies Involving Gilead HIV Treatments
HIV-1-infection
RecruitingPhase 2
Long-Term Immunogenicity of the altSonflex1-2-3 Shigella Vaccine in African Children
Diarrhoea
RecruitingObservational study
Audiological Rehabilitation of Children With Unilateral Hearing Loss
Unilateral Hearing Loss
Recruiting
Mobility Performance in Daily Activities Among Children Wearing Spectacle Lenses
Myopia, Myopia Progression
RecruitingPhase 2
Entrectinib as a Single Agent in Upfront Therapy for Children <3 Years of Age With NTRK1/2/3 or ROS1-FUSED CNS Tumors
High Grade Glioma, CNS Tumor

All Children, Only trials

Study at a glance

From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 17 Feb 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.

Official title: Reducing Pesticide Exposures to Preschool-age Children in California Child Care Centers
ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT03319927
Acronym / sponsor ID: HCES / 4000 317004 130129A 01 44
Conditions: Children, Only, Risk Reduction, Environmental Exposure
Keywords: integrated pest management, environmental health, child care, preschool children, pesticides
Study type: Interventional
Recruitment status: Completed
Enrolment: 987 participants (actual)
Lead sponsor: University of California, San FranciscoUniversity, hospital or other
Collaborators: National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), University of California, Berkeley, Oregon State University
Study start: 9 Oct 2017 (actual)
Primary completion: 1 Aug 2024 (actual)
Study completion: 1 Aug 2024 (actual)
First posted: 24 Oct 2017 (actual)
Results: Posted 17 Feb 2026

Clinical summary

The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.

Detailed description

Study design

Primary purpose: Prevention
Allocation: Randomised
Intervention model: Parallel groups
Masking: None (open label)
Number of arms: 2
Model description: This randomized control study included 85 child care centers in five CA counties and was conducted in 9-month cycles over six years. The counties were matched and randomized to the intervention group (integrated pest management) or attention control group (physical activity). Each study cycle included Recruitment, Baseline Assessments, Intervention, and Post-Intervention Assessments. Baseline Assessments were completed as director interviews and surveys, child care provider surveys, research assistant-completed objective observations using standardized Checklist, center dust samples to measure pesticides, and silicone wristband personal samplers worn by 5 children per center for 30 hours. During the 7-month Intervention phase, CCHCs conducted one workshop per center on the intervention topic (IPM or physical activity) and provided monthly consultations with the center directors. The Post-Intervention stage repeated all the baseline assessments.

Arm	Type	Receives
Integrated pest management	Experimental	Behavioral: Changes in pesticide exposure, Behavioral: IPM Practices, Behavioral: Educational WorkshopsThe intervention consists of an integrated pest management (IPM) educational workshop, providing IPM materials, and monthly consultation. The child care health consultants (CCHCs) conduct the educational workshop for child care center directors and providers on IPM practices including the providers' practices and beliefs. The workshop includes a slide presentation on pesticides and IPM practices and the directors receive an IPM Toolkit and IPM toolbox. After the workshop and baseline measures are completed, the CCHCs meet with center directors to review the results of the baseline observational Checklists and the directors identify center-specific intervention goals. Monthly child care health consultation visits are conducted with the director to review the center's progress towards the goals, discuss problems, and share resources.
Physical activity	Active comparator	Behavioral: Changes in pesticide exposure, Behavioral: IPM PracticesThe attention control group is given an intervention covering physical activity (PA) for preschool-age children in child care centers. The PA intervention includes the same intensity as the IPM intervention provided by a child care health consultant (CCHC). The CCHC conducts a workshop on physical activity that includes a slide presentation and the directors receive a Physical Activity Toolkit and toolbox. After the workshop and baseline measures are completed, the CCHCs meet with center directors to review the results of the baseline observational Checklists and the directors identify center-specific intervention goals. Monthly child care health consultation visits are conducted with the director to review the center's progress towards the goals, discuss problems, and share resources.

Who may qualify

Ages: 3 to 75 years
Sex: All
Healthy volunteers: Accepted
Age groups: Child, Adult, Older adult

Key inclusion criteria (18 listed)

Be a licensed child care center with a child care director who speaks English
Used pesticides (i.e., baits or sprays) in the last year
Operated for at least two years with no plans to close in the next 12 months
Enroll children between three to five years of age of diverse ethnic and racial backgrounds
Have at least 25% of enrolled children receiving a government subsidy (e.g., Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP), Head Start, Child Care Development Fund, Alternative Payment program).

Key exclusion criteria (4 listed)

Centers that participated in an IPM intervention and training project
Families that have children who have special health care needs or disabilities who can not participate in physical activity at the child care center.
Center directors who do not read and write in English.
Child care providers who do not read and write in English.

Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.

Interventions

Intervention	Type	Arms
Changes in pesticide exposureAlso: Child care health consultant assessment and interventionIn the IPM centers the child care health consultant reviews the IPM baseline assessments and provides 7 monthly consultation visits to decrease the centers exposure to pesticides. Pre- and post- carpet dust samples and children's individual silicone wristbands are collected to identify changes in pesticide detection limits and concentrations at the child care center-level in both the IPM and PA centers pre- and post-intervention.	Behavioural	Integrated pest management, Physical activity
IPM PracticesIn the IPM centers, a research assistant completed the IPM Checklist which identifies the IPM practices that the center meets and doesn't meet. The child care health consultant reviews the IPM Checklist findings with the child care center director after the baseline Checklist is completed. The IPM Checklist is completed pre- and post-intervention in the IPM and PA centers. The post-intervention IPM Checklist findings are compared to the baseline IPM Checklist findings to identify changes in IPM practices in both the IPM and PA centers.	Behavioural	Integrated pest management, Physical activity
Educational WorkshopsThe IPM center directors and providers attend an IPM workshop and complete a survey to assess their knowledge of IPM practices pre- and post-workshop. The level of knowledge change is assessed by comparing the number of correct responses on the post-workshop survey compared to the pre-workshop survey.	Behavioural	Integrated pest management

Primary outcome

Decrease in Child Care Center Pesticides
Time frame: Pre-intervention, 9 months after the workshop
Change in the levels of pesticide exposures collected in carpet dust samples in the child care centers from baseline to 9 months later. Pesticides are summarized as geometric mean concentration (ng/g) and then the log10 is applied to the data. Carpet dust samples were collected in each child care center at pre-intervention and post-intervention. A decrease in pesticide concentration from pre-intervention to post-intervention is represented as a negative value. A negative change score would be a positive finding with a decrease in pesticide concentration post-intervention.
Decrease in Children's Exposure to Pesticides
Time frame: Pre-intervention and 9 months later (post-intervention)
Change in the levels of pesticide exposures collected in personal silicone wristbands worn by 3 to 5 of the preschool-age children in each child care center. They wore the wristbands for ~30 hours pre-intervention/baseline and 9 months later. Pesticides are summarized as geometric mean concentration (ng/mL) and then log10 is applied to the data. A decrease in pesticide concentration from pre-intervention to post-intervention is represented as a negative value. A negative change score would be a positive finding with a decrease in pesticide concentration post-intervention.
Increase in Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Practices
Time frame: Pre-Intervention and 9 months later
The IPM practices were measured objectively with a standardized IPM Checklist during a 2-hour observational assessment at baseline/pre-intervention and then 9 months later using a standardized measure (Alkon etal, JPHC, 2016). The IPM practices observed included having garbage cans with liners and lids, using bait stations if there are pests, having window screens with no holes, no water leaks, and outside garbage bins on cement surfaces. Each item on the Checklist is marked as 1 (yes) or O (no). The mean ranged from 0 (no practices observed) to 1 (all of the items were observed). An increase in IPM practices would be positive change in the mean score post-intervention compared to pre-intervention.

3 secondary outcomes

Decrease in the Presence of Pests
Time frame: Pre-intervention and 9 months later
Director's Self-Efficacy
Time frame: The Self-Efficacy Survey is completed by the directors pre-intervention and after the intervention (7 to 9 months later).
Number of Child Care Centers With Written IPM Policies
Time frame: 9 months

Results and safety

Results posted to the registry on 17 Feb 2026, as reported by the sponsor. Figures are copied from the record, not re-analysed. Full results on ClinicalTrials.gov.

Participant flow

Group	Started	Completed
Integrated Pest Management (IPM)	493	402
Physical Activity (PA)	494	403

Primary outcome: Decrease in Child Care Center Pesticides

Time frame: Pre-intervention, 9 months after the workshop. Geometric mean (Standard Deviation). Unit: log10(ng/g)

Measure	Integrated Pest Management (IPM) n = 39	Physical Activity (PA) n = 37
Bifenthrin	1.95 (1.06)	1.87 (1.12)
Chlorpyrifos	0.59 (0.37)	0.53 (0.35)
Cis-Permethrin	2.21 (0.43)	2.30 (0.73)
Cypermethrin	2.32 (0.86)	1.97 (0.86)
Fipronil	1.85 (0.77)	1.58 (0.67)
L-Cyhalothrin	1.36 (0.75)	1.16 (0.45)
Piperonyl	1.71 (0.59)	1.71 (0.59)
Trans-Permethrin	2.43 (0.46)	2.43 (0.46)

Integrated Pest Management (IPM) vs Physical Activity (PA): p <0.05, Tobit regression

Population analysed: The carpet dust was analyzed for pesticides concentration for each child care center. The participant is child care center and the units are the number of child care centers. At the post-intervention period, some centers dropped out of the study: 5 IPM centers and 4 PA centers. The unit of analysis is the child care center and the concentration of the pesticides were summarized using the geometric mean as log 10(ng/g).

Primary outcome: Decrease in Children's Exposure to Pesticides

Time frame: Pre-intervention and 9 months later (post-intervention). Geometric mean (Standard Deviation). Unit: log10(ng/g)

Measure	Integrated Pest Management n = 195	Physical Activity n = 198
Bifenthrin	-0.04 (0.62)	0.17 (0.78)
Chlorpyrifos	-0.31 (0.31)	-0.29 (0.27)
Cis-Permethrin	0.35 (1.05)	0.24 (1.30)
Cypermethrin	0.83 (0.76)	0.65 (0.69)
Fipronil	0.24 (0.65)	0.16 (0.50)
Trans-Permethrin	0.51 (1.03)	0.65 (1.22)

Integrated Pest Management vs Physical Activity: p <0.05, Tobit regression

Population analysed: The # participants are the # of children and # of units are the # of child care centers. There are 8 IPM centers and 6 PA centers with no post-intervention wristband data. Some of the centers were dropped from the study and didn't complete the intervention and other centers had too few children participating and didn't meet the criteria with a minimum of 3 children participating per center.

Primary outcome: Increase in Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Practices

Time frame: Pre-Intervention and 9 months later. Mean (Standard Deviation). Unit: score on a scale

Measure	Integrated Pest Management n = 39	Physical Activity n = 36
Value	0.83 (0.07)	0.78 (0.11)

Integrated Pest Management vs Physical Activity: p = .001, t-test, 2 sided

Population analysed: The IPM Checklist was not completed in 6 IPM centers and 5 PA centers. The centers didn't complete the post-intervention data collection since they dropped out of the study or the research assistant was not able to complete the data collection.

3 secondary outcomes are reported in the full results.

Adverse events

Time frame: There were 6 cohorts of child care directors, child care providers, and children followed for 9 to 12 months.. Other adverse events reported at 0% frequency or more

Group	Serious adverse events	Other adverse events	Deaths
Integrated Pest Management (IPM)	0 of 309 (0%)	0 of 309 (0%)	0 of 309
Physical Activity (PA)	0 of 303 (0%)	0 of 303 (0%)	0 of 303

Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…

Research links

Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 17 Feb 2026.
Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
Background: PubMed 27553118Alkon A, Nouredini S, Swartz A, Sutherland AM, Stephens M, Davidson NA, Rose R. Integrated Pest Management Intervention in Child Care Centers Improves Knowledge, Pest Control, and Practices. J Pediatr Health Care. 2016 Nov-Dec;30(6):e27-e41. doi: 10.1016/j.pedhc.2016.07.004. Epub 2016 Aug 20.
BackgroundBradman, A, Gasper, F, Castorina, R, Tong-Lin, E, McKone, T, & Maddelena, R. (2012). Environmental exposures in early childhood education environments (Agreement Number 08-305). Retrieved from Berkeley, CA:
Background: PubMed 28844239Vidi PA, Anderson KA, Chen H, Anderson R, Salvador-Moreno N, Mora DC, Poutasse C, Laurienti PJ, Daniel SS, Arcury TA. Personal samplers of bioavailable pesticides integrated with a hair follicle assay of DNA damage to assess environmental exposures and their associated risks in children. Mutat Res Genet Toxicol Environ Mutagen. 2017 Oct;822:27-33. doi: 10.1016/j.mrgentox.2017.07.003. Epub 2017 Jul 16.
Results publication: PubMed 34629233Alkon A, Gunier RB, Hazard K, Castorina R, Hoffman PD, Scott RP, Anderson KA, Bradman A. Preschool-Age Children's Pesticide Exposures in Child Care Centers and at Home in Northern California. J Pediatr Health Care. 2022 Jan-Feb;36(1):34-45. doi: 10.1016/j.pedhc.2021.09.004. Epub 2021 Oct 8.
Results publication: PubMed 36599924Hazard K, Alkon A, Gunier RB, Castorina R, Camann D, Quarderer S, Bradman A. Predictors of pesticide levels in carpet dust collected from child care centers in Northern California, USA. J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol. 2024 Mar;34(2):229-240. doi: 10.1038/s41370-022-00516-8.
Individual participant dataSharing planned: No

Related trials for Children, Only

RecruitingPhase 4
A Study to Provide Continued Access to Study Drug to Children and Adolescents Who Have Completed Clinical Studies Involving Gilead HIV Treatments
HIV-1-infection
RecruitingPhase 2
Long-Term Immunogenicity of the altSonflex1-2-3 Shigella Vaccine in African Children
Diarrhoea
RecruitingObservational study
Audiological Rehabilitation of Children With Unilateral Hearing Loss
Unilateral Hearing Loss
Recruiting
Mobility Performance in Daily Activities Among Children Wearing Spectacle Lenses
Myopia, Myopia Progression
RecruitingPhase 2
Entrectinib as a Single Agent in Upfront Therapy for Children <3 Years of Age With NTRK1/2/3 or ROS1-FUSED CNS Tumors
High Grade Glioma, CNS Tumor

Referral and contact

AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.

Thaddeus Schug, PhD study chair

National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences

1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 18 inclusion and 4 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 17 Feb 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 17 Feb 2026). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Decrease in Child Care Center Pesticides (time frame: Pre-intervention, 9 months after the workshop). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT03319927, which also lists 5 linked publications.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 17 Feb 2026.