ReviewPathogens (Basel, Switzerland)2019
Assessing the Occurrence of Waterborne Viruses in Reuse Systems: Analytical Limits and Needs.
Review in Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- The use of faecal indicator organisms to manage microbial health risks in recreational waterways not impacted by point sources of sewage: a systematic review of the epidemiological evidence.Journal of water and health · 2025Pooled it
- A Bayesian Model for Estimation of Virus Reduction in Potable Reuse Treatment Trains and Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment of Waterborne Viral Pathogens.Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2026Article
- Quantification of Particle-Associated Viruses in Secondary Treated Wastewater Effluent.Food and environmental virology · 2025Article
- Microbial Treatment Targets for Potable and Nonpotable Water Reuse - A Comprehensive Update and Harmonization.Environmental science & technology letters · 2024Article
- Searching for a Reliable Viral Indicator of Faecal Pollution in Aquatic Environments.Journal of microbiology (Seoul, Korea) · 2023Review
- The occurrence and control of waterborne viruses in drinking water treatment: A review.Chemosphere · 2021Review
- Capsid integrity quantitative PCR to determine virus infectivity in environmental and food applications - A systematic review.Water research X · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Detection of waterborne enteric viruses is an essential tool in assessing the risk of waterborne transmission. Cell culture is considered a gold standard for detection of these viruses. However, it is important to recognize the uncertainty and limitations of enteric virus detection in cell culture. Cell culture cannot support replication of all virus types and strains, and numerous factors control the efficacy of specific virus detection assays, including chemical additives, cell culture passage number, and sequential passage of a sample in cell culture. These factors can result in a 2- to 100-fold underestimation of virus infectivity. Molecular methods reduce the time for detection of viruses and are useful for detection of those that do not produce cytopathogenic effects. The usefulness of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) to access virus infectivity has been demonstrated for only a limited number of enteric viruses and is limited by an understanding of the mechanism of virus inactivation. All of these issues are important to consider when assessing waterborne infectious viruses and expected goals on virus reductions needed for recycled water. The use of safety factors to account for this may be useful to ensure that the risks in drinking water and recycled water for potable reuse are minimized.
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.