Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26861371›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2016

Legacies of Lead in Charm City's Soil: Lessons from the Baltimore Ecosystem Study.

Kirsten Schwarz, Richard V Pouyat, Ian Yesilonis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Editorial: Lead Risk Assessment and Health Effects.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2016
    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

3 authors.

Kirsten SchwarzDepartment of Biological Sciences, Northern Kentucky University, Nunn Drive, Highland Heights, KY 41099, USA. schwarzk1@nku.edu.
Richard V PouyatUSDA Forest Service, Research & Development, Washington, DC 20250, USA. rpouyat@fs.fed.us.
Ian YesilonisUSDA Forest Service, 5523 Research Park, Suite 350, Baltimore, MD 21228, USA. iyesilonis@fs.fed.us.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Understanding the spatial distribution of soil lead has been a focus of the Baltimore Ecosystem Study since its inception in 1997. Through multiple research projects that span spatial scales and use different methodologies, three overarching patterns have been identified: (1) soil lead concentrations often exceed state and federal regulatory limits; (2) the variability of soil lead concentrations is high; and (3) despite multiple sources and the highly heterogeneous and patchy nature of soil lead, discernable patterns do exist. Specifically, housing age, the distance to built structures, and the distance to a major roadway are strong predictors of soil lead concentrations. Understanding what drives the spatial distribution of soil lead can inform the transition of underutilized urban space into gardens and other desirable land uses while protecting human health. A framework for management is proposed that considers three factors: (1) the level of contamination; (2) the desired land use; and (3) the community's preference in implementing the desired land use. The goal of the framework is to promote dialogue and resultant policy changes that support consistent and clear regulatory guidelines for soil lead, without which urban communities will continue to be subject to the potential for lead exposure.

Indexed as

BaltimoreCitiesEcosystemEnvironmental MonitoringHumansSoilSoil PollutantsSoilSoil PollutantsBaltimore Ecosystem Studyheavy metalsleadsoilurban

Identifiers

PMID26861371
PMCPMC4772229

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.