ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2015
Different Choices of Drinking Water Source and Different Health Risks in a Rural Population Living Near a Lead/Zinc Mine in Chenzhou City, Southern China.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Heavy Metals Like Aluminum, Arsenic, Cadmium, Chromium, Copper, Iron, Lead, Manganese, Mercury, Nickel, and Zinc Polluting the Drinking Water: Their Individual Health Hazards.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Influence of cephalexin on cadmium adsorption onto microplastic particles in water: Human health risk evaluation.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Health risk assessment of selected metals through tap water consumption in Upper Silesia, Poland.Journal of environmental health science & engineering · 2020Article
- Human health risk assessment of trace elements in drinking tap water in Zahedan city, Iran.Journal of environmental health science & engineering · 2019Article
- Preliminary human health risk assessment of arsenic and fluoride in tap water from Zacatecas, México.Environmental monitoring and assessment · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to describe the households' choices of drinking water sources, and evaluate the risk of human exposure to heavy metals via different drinking water sources in Chenzhou City of Hunan Province, Southern China. A cross-sectional face-to-face survey of 192 householders in MaTian and ZhuDui village was conducted. The concentrations of heavy metals in their drinking water sources were analyzed. Carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic risk assessment was performed according to the method recommended by the United States Environmental Protection Agency. In total, 52.60% of the households used hand-pressed well water, and 34.89% used barreled water for drinking. In total, 6.67% of the water samples exceeded the Chinese drinking water standards. The total health risk of five metals is 5.20 × 10(-9)~3.62 × 10(-5). The total health risk of five metals was at acceptable levels for drinking water sources. However, the total risk of using hand-pressed well water's highest value is 6961 times higher than the risk of using tap water. Household income level was significantly associated with drinking water choices. Arsenic (As) and lead (Pb) are priority controlled pollutants in this region. Using safe drinking water (tap water, barreled water and so on) can remarkably reduce the risk of ingesting heavy metals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.