Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29230646›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2018

Abundance of Naegleria fowleri in roof-harvested rainwater tank samples from two continents.

Monique Waso, Penelope Heather Dobrowsky, Kerry Ann Hamilton, Geoffrey Puzon, Haylea Miller, Wesaal Khan, Warish Ahmed

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Microbiological Health Risk Assessment of Water Conservation Strategies: A Case Study in Amsterdam.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  7. Review
  8. 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.

Monique WasoDepartment of Microbiology, Faculty of Science, Stellenbosch University, Private Bag X1, Stellenbosch, 7602, South Africa.
Penelope Heather DobrowskyDepartment of Microbiology, Faculty of Science, Stellenbosch University, Private Bag X1, Stellenbosch, 7602, South Africa.
Kerry Ann HamiltonDrexel University, 3141 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
Geoffrey PuzonCSIRO Land and Water, Private Bag No.5, Wembley, WA, 6913, Australia.
Haylea MillerCSIRO Land and Water, Private Bag No.5, Wembley, WA, 6913, Australia.
Wesaal KhanDepartment of Microbiology, Faculty of Science, Stellenbosch University, Private Bag X1, Stellenbosch, 7602, South Africa.
Warish AhmedCSIRO Land and Water, Ecosciences Precinct, 41 Boggo Road, Brisbane, QLD, 4102, Australia. Warish.Ahmed@csiro.au.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Roof-harvested rainwater (RHRW) has been used as an alternative source of water in water scarce regions of many countries. The microbiological and chemical quality of RHRW has been questioned due to the presence of bacterial and protozoan pathogens. However, information on the occurrence of pathogenic amoeba in RHRW tank samples is needed due to their health risk potential and known associations with opportunistic pathogens. Therefore, this study aims to determine the quantitative occurrence of Naegleria fowleri in RHRW tank samples from Southeast Queensland (SEQ), Australia (AU), and the Kleinmond Housing Scheme located in Kleinmond, South Africa (SA). In all, 134 and 80 RHRW tank samples were collected from SEQ, and the Kleinmond Housing Scheme, Western Cape, SA, respectively. Quantitative PCR (qPCR) assays were used to measure the concentrations of N. fowleri, and culture-based methods were used to measure fecal indicator bacteria (FIB) Escherichia coli (E. coli) and Enterococcus spp. Of the 134 tank water samples tested from AU, 69 and 62.7% were positive for E. coli, and Enterococcus spp., respectively. For the SA tank water samples, FIB analysis was conducted for samples SA-T41 to SA-T80 (n = 40). Of the 40 samples analyzed from SA, 95 and 35% were positive for E. coli and Enterococcus spp., respectively. Of the 134 water samples tested in AU, 15 (11.2%) water samples were positive for N. fowleri, and the concentrations ranged from 1.7 × 10

Indexed as

Water MicrobiologyEnterococcusEnvironmental MonitoringEscherichia coliFecesNaegleria fowleriQueenslandRainSouth AfricaFecal indicator bacteriaHealth risksNaegleria fowleriRoof-harvested rainwater

Identifiers

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.