Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16451859›Full record

Trial reportEnvironmental health perspectives2006

A randomized controlled trial assessing infectious disease risks from bathing in fresh recreational waters in relation to the concentration of Escherichia coli, intestinal enterococci, Clostridium perfringens, and somatic coliphages.

Albrecht Wiedenmann, Petra Krüger, Klaus Dietz, Juan M López-Pila, Regine Szewzyk, Konrad Botzenhart

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Environmental health perspectives, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Interventions to improve water quality for preventing diarrhoea.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015
    Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Acute gastrointestinal illness burden associated with water recreation in high-income countries: A scoping review.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Bathing Water Quality Monitoring Practices in Europe and the United States.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Albrecht WiedenmannDistrict Government Stuttgart, State Health Office, Stuttgart, Germany. albrecht.wiedenmann@arcor.de
Petra Krüger
Klaus Dietz
Juan M López-Pila
Regine Szewzyk
Konrad Botzenhart

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We performed epidemiologic studies at public freshwater bathing sites in Germany to provide a better scientific basis for the definition of recreational water quality standards. A total of 2,196 participants were recruited from the local population and randomized into bathers and nonbathers. Bathers were exposed for 10 min and had to immerse their head at least three times. Water samples for microbiological analysis were collected at 20-min intervals. Unbiased concentration-response effects with no-observed-adverse-effect levels (NOAELs) were demonstrated for three different definitions of gastroenteritis and four fecal indicator organisms. Relative risks for bathing in waters with levels above NOAELs compared with nonbathing ranged from 1.8 (95% CI, 1.2-2.6) to 4.6 (95% CI, 2.1-10.1), depending on the definition of gastroenteritis. The effect of swallowing water provided additional evidence for true dose-response relationships. Based on the NOAELs, the following guide values for water quality are suggested: 100 Escherichia coli, 25 intestinal enterococci, 10 somatic coliphages, or 10 Clostridium perfringens per 100 mL. Recreational water quality standards are intended to protect the health of those consumers who are not already immune or resistant to pathogens that may be associated with indicator organisms. In contrast to current World Health Organization recommendations, we concluded that standards should be based on rates of compliance with NOAELs rather than on attributable risks determined above NOAELs, because these risks depend mainly on the unpredictable susceptibility of the cohorts. Although in theory there is no threshold in real concentration-response relationships, we demonstrated that a NOAEL approach would be a more robust and practical solution to the complex problem of setting standards.

Indexed as

RecreationClostridium perfringensColiphagesDisease Transmission, InfectiousEnterococcusEnterocolitis, PseudomembranousEpidemiologic StudiesEscherichia coli InfectionsFecesHumansNo-Observed-Adverse-Effect LevelRandom AllocationRisk AssessmentSwimmingWater Microbiology

Identifiers

PMID16451859
PMCPMC1367836

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.