ArticleWater research X2018
Within-day variability in microbial concentrations at a UK designated bathing water: Implications for regulatory monitoring and the application of predictive modelling based on historical compliance data.
Article in Water research X, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessment of water pollution and environmental impacts in the Pineios river basin before and after extreme flood events in Thessaly, Greece.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2025Article
- Designating river environments as bathing waters: challenges and opportunities at the science-policy interface.Sustainable microbiology · 2025Review
- Scale of analysis drives the observed ratio of spatial to non-spatial variance in microbial water quality: insights from two decades of citizen science data.Journal of applied microbiology · 2023Article
- Impacts of an Urban Sanitation Intervention on Fecal Indicators and the Prevalence of Human Fecal Contamination in Mozambique.Environmental science & technology · 2021Article
- Bathing Water Quality Monitoring Practices in Europe and the United States.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Review
- Microbial Indicators of Fecal Pollution: Recent Progress and Challenges in Assessing Water Quality.Current environmental health reports · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Prediction of bathing water quality is recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO), the European Union (EU) and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and is an established element in bathing water management designed to protect public health. Most commonly, historical regulatory compliance data are used for model calibration and provide the dependent variable for modelling. Independent (or predictor) variables (e.g. rainfall, river flow and received irradiance) measured over some antecedent period are used to deliver prediction of the faecal indicator concentration measured on the day of the regulatory sample collection. The implied linked assumptions of this approach are, therefore, that; (i) the independent variables accurately predict the bathing-day water quality; which is (ii) accurately characterized by the single regulatory sample. Assumption (ii) will not be the case where significant within-day variability in water quality is evident. This study built a detailed record of water quality change through 60 days at a UK coastal bathing water in 2011 using half-hourly samples each subjected to triplicate filtration designed to enhance enumeration precision. On average, the mean daily variation in FIO concentrations exceeded 1 log
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.