Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27716139›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2016

Comparison of pharmaceutical, illicit drug, alcohol, nicotine and caffeine levels in wastewater with sale, seizure and consumption data for 8 European cities.

Jose Antonio Baz-Lomba, Stefania Salvatore, Emma Gracia-Lor, Richard Bade, Sara Castiglioni, Erika Castrignanò, Ana Causanilles, Felix Hernandez, Barbara Kasprzyk-Hordern, Juliet Kinyua and 11 more

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

42 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 191 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

21 authors at 9 institutions in 8 countries.

Jose Antonio Baz-LombaNorwegian Institute for Water Research (NIVA), Gaustadalléen 21, Oslo, NO-0349, Norway. Joseantonio.baz@niva.no.
Stefania SalvatoreNorwegian Centre for Addiction Research, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, PO box 1078, Blindern, Oslo, 0316, Norway.
Emma Gracia-LorIRCCS-Istituto di Recerche Farmacologiche "Mario Negri", Via La Masa 19, Milan, 20156, Italy.
Richard BadeResearch Institute for Pesticides and Water, University Jaume I, Avda. Sos Baynat s/n, Castellón, E-12071, Spain.
Sara CastiglioniIRCCS-Istituto di Recerche Farmacologiche "Mario Negri", Via La Masa 19, Milan, 20156, Italy.
Erika CastrignanòDepartment of Chemistry, University of Bath, Faculty of Science, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK.
Ana CausanillesKWR Watercycle Research Institute, Chemical Water Quality and Health, P.O. Box 1072, Nieuwegein, 3430 BB, The Netherlands.
Felix HernandezResearch Institute for Pesticides and Water, University Jaume I, Avda. Sos Baynat s/n, Castellón, E-12071, Spain.
Barbara Kasprzyk-HordernDepartment of Chemistry, University of Bath, Faculty of Science, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK.
Juliet KinyuaDepartment of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Toxicological Center, Campus Drie Eiken, University of Antwerp, Universiteitsplein 1, Antwerp, 2610, Belgium.
Ann-Kathrin McCallEawag, Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology, Dübendorf, CH-8600, Switzerland.
Alexander van NuijsDepartment of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Toxicological Center, Campus Drie Eiken, University of Antwerp, Universiteitsplein 1, Antwerp, 2610, Belgium.
Christoph OrtEawag, Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology, Dübendorf, CH-8600, Switzerland.
Benedek G PlószDepartment of Environmental Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Miljøvej, Building 115, Kgs. Lyngby, DK-2800, Denmark.
Pedram RaminDepartment of Environmental Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Miljøvej, Building 115, Kgs. Lyngby, DK-2800, Denmark.
Malcolm ReidNorwegian Institute for Water Research (NIVA), Gaustadalléen 21, Oslo, NO-0349, Norway.
Nikolaos I RousisIRCCS-Istituto di Recerche Farmacologiche "Mario Negri", Via La Masa 19, Milan, 20156, Italy.
Yeonsuk RyuNorwegian Institute for Water Research (NIVA), Gaustadalléen 21, Oslo, NO-0349, Norway.
Pim de VoogtKWR Watercycle Research Institute, Chemical Water Quality and Health, P.O. Box 1072, Nieuwegein, 3430 BB, The Netherlands.
Jorgen BramnessNorwegian Centre for Addiction Research, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, PO box 1078, Blindern, Oslo, 0316, Norway.
Kevin ThomasNorwegian Institute for Water Research (NIVA), Gaustadalléen 21, Oslo, NO-0349, Norway.
Norwegian Institute for Water Research · NOMario Negri Institute for Pharmacological Research · ITKWR Water Research Institute · NLSwiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology · CHTechnical University of Denmark · DKUniversitat Jaume I · ESUniversity of Antwerp · BEUniversity of Bath · GBUniversity of Oslo · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMonitoring the scale of pharmaceuticals, illicit and licit drugs consumption is important to assess the needs of law enforcement and public health, and provides more information about the different trends within different countries. Community drug use patterns are usually described by national surveys, sales and seizure data. Wastewater-based epidemiology (WBE) has been shown to be a reliable approach complementing such surveys.

methodThis study aims to compare and correlate the consumption estimates of pharmaceuticals, illicit drugs, alcohol, nicotine and caffeine from wastewater analysis and other sources of information. Wastewater samples were collected in 2015 from 8 different European cities over a one week period, representing a population of approximately 5 million people. Published pharmaceutical sale, illicit drug seizure and alcohol, tobacco and caffeine use data were used for the comparison.

resultsHigh agreement was found between wastewater and other data sources for pharmaceuticals and cocaine, whereas amphetamines, alcohol and caffeine showed a moderate correlation. methamphetamine and 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA) and nicotine did not correlate with other sources of data. Most of the poor correlations were explained as part of the uncertainties related with the use estimates and were improved with other complementary sources of data.

conclusionsThis work confirms the promising future of WBE as a complementary approach to obtain a more accurate picture of substance use situation within different communities. Our findings suggest further improvements to reduce the uncertainties associated with both sources of information in order to make the data more comparable.

Indexed as

CaffeineEthanolNicotinePharmaceutical PreparationsSubstance Abuse DetectionAlcohol DrinkingAmphetaminesBeveragesCentral Nervous System StimulantsCitiesCocaineCommerceEuropeHumansIllicit DrugsMethamphetamineAmphetaminesCaffeineCentral Nervous System StimulantsCocaineEthanolIllicit DrugsMethamphetamineNicotineN-Methyl-3,4-methylenedioxyamphetaminePharmaceutical PreparationsWastewaterWater Pollutants, ChemicalDrug consumption, Correlation, Europe-wide study, Seizures, Sales statisticsWastewater-based epidemiology

Identifiers

PMID27716139
PMCPMC5045646
OpenAlexW2525991237

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.