Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17942092›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental research2008

Validity of spatial models of arsenic concentrations in private well water.

Jaymie R Meliker, Gillian A AvRuskin, Melissa J Slotnick, Pierre Goovaerts, David Schottenfeld, Geoffrey M Jacquez, Jerome O Nriagu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental research, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Ambient UVR and Environmental Arsenic Exposure in Relation to Cutaneous Melanoma in Iowa.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

7 authors.

Jaymie R MelikerBioMedware, Inc., Ann Arbor, MI, USA. jrmeliker@gmail.com
Gillian A AvRuskin
Melissa J Slotnick
Pierre Goovaerts
David Schottenfeld
Geoffrey M Jacquez
Jerome O Nriagu

Funding

Arsenic Exposure and Bladder Cancer in MichiganR01CA096002 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI NRIAGU, JEROME · 2002 to 2006
$2.3M
A Space-Time Information System for the NCI Cancer AtlasR01CA092669 · NCI · BIOMEDWARE · PI JACQUEZ, GEOFFREY M. · 2001 to 2003
$1.1M
STroodle: A GIS Foundation Class LibraryR44ES010220 · NIEHS · BIOMEDWARE · PI JACQUEZ, GEOFFREY M. · 2001 to 2002
$750k
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA092669NCI NIH HHS R01 CA096002NCI NIH HHS R01 CA96002-10NIEHS NIH HHS R44 ES010220
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveArsenic is a pervasive contaminant in underground aquifers worldwide, yet documentation of health effects associated with low-to-moderate concentrations (<100microg/L) has been stymied by uncertainties in assessing long-term exposure. A critical component of assessing exposure to arsenic in drinking water is the development of models for predicting arsenic concentrations in private well water in the past; however, these models are seldom validated. The objective of this paper is to validate alternative spatial models of arsenic concentrations in private well water in southeastern Michigan.

methodsFrom 1993 to 2002, the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality analyzed arsenic concentrations in water from 6050 private wells. This dataset was used to develop several spatial models of arsenic concentrations in well water: proxy wells based on nearest-neighbor relationships, averages across geographic regions, and geostatistically derived estimates based on spatial correlation and geologic factors. Output from these models was validated using arsenic concentrations measured in 371 private wells from 2003 to 2006.

resultsThe geostatisical model and nearest-neighbor approach outperformed the models based on geographic averages. The geostatistical model produced the highest degree of correlation using continuous data (Pearson's r=0.61; Spearman's rank rho=0.46) while the nearest-neighbor approach produced the strongest correlation (kappa(weighted)=0.58) using an a priori categorization of arsenic concentrations (<5, 5-9.99, 10-19.99, > or = 20microg/L). When the maximum contaminant level was used as a cut-off in a two-category classification (<10, > or =10microg/L), the nearest-neighbor approach and geostatistical model had similar values for sensitivity (0.62-0.63), specificity (0.80), negative predictive value (0.85), positive predictive value (0.53), and percent agreement (75%). DISCUSSION: This validation study reveals that geostatistical modeling and nearest-neighbor approaches are effective spatial models for predicting arsenic concentrations in private well water. Further validation analyses in other regions are necessary to indicate how widely these findings may be generalized.

Indexed as

Models, TheoreticalArsenicEnvironmental MonitoringFresh WaterMichiganReproducibility of ResultsWater Pollutants, ChemicalWater SupplyArsenicWater Pollutants, Chemical

Identifiers

PMID17942092
PMCPMC2271042

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.