Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29107913›Full record

ArticleWater research2018

Direct potable reuse microbial risk assessment methodology: Sensitivity analysis and application to State log credit allocations.

Jeffrey A Soller, Sorina E Eftim, Sharon P Nappier

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Water research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Selective elimination of enterovirus genotypes by activated sludge and chlorination.Environmental science : water research & technology · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Antibiotic Resistance in Recreational Waters: State of the Science.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Potable Water Reuse: What Are the Microbiological Risks?Current environmental health reports · 2018
    Review
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.

Jeffrey A SollerSoller Environmental, LLC, 3022 King St, Berkeley, CA, 94703, USA.
Sorina E EftimICF, LLC, 9300 Lee Highway, Fairfax, VA, 22031, USA.
Sharon P NappierU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Office of Science and Technology, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC, 20460, USA. Electronic address: Nappier.Sharon@epa.gov.

Funding

Intramural EPA EPA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Understanding pathogen risks is a critically important consideration in the design of water treatment, particularly for potable reuse projects. As an extension to our published microbial risk assessment methodology to estimate infection risks associated with Direct Potable Reuse (DPR) treatment train unit process combinations, herein, we (1) provide an updated compilation of pathogen density data in raw wastewater and dose-response models; (2) conduct a series of sensitivity analyses to consider potential risk implications using updated data; (3) evaluate the risks associated with log credit allocations in the United States; and (4) identify reference pathogen reductions needed to consistently meet currently applied benchmark risk levels. Sensitivity analyses illustrated changes in cumulative annual risks estimates, the significance of which depends on the pathogen group driving the risk for a given treatment train. For example, updates to norovirus (NoV) raw wastewater values and use of a NoV dose-response approach, capturing the full range of uncertainty, increased risks associated with one of the treatment trains evaluated, but not the other. Additionally, compared to traditional log-credit allocation approaches, our results indicate that the risk methodology provides more nuanced information about how consistently public health benchmarks are achieved. Our results indicate that viruses need to be reduced by 14 logs or more to consistently achieve currently applied benchmark levels of protection associated with DPR. The refined methodology, updated model inputs, and log credit allocation comparisons will be useful to regulators considering DPR projects and design engineers as they consider which unit treatment processes should be employed for particular projects.

Indexed as

BenchmarkingHumansNorovirusRisk AssessmentSewageUncertaintyVirusesWastewaterWater PurificationSewageWastewaterAdvanced water treatmentDirect potable reuseLog credit allocationsQuantitative microbial risk assessmentReclaimed waterRecycled water

Identifiers

PMID29107913
PMCPMC6816270

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.