ArticleEnvironmental geochemistry and health2021
Environmental and human health risk assessment of potentially toxic elements in soils around the largest coal-fired power station in Southern Russia.
Article in Environmental geochemistry and health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 43 citations in OpenAlex.
- Integrated Biochemical and Ultrastructural Responses ofPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Innovative isotopic modeling and risk assessment of PTEs and PAHs in urban soils.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Potentially toxic elements (PTEs) and ecological risk at waste disposal sites: An analysis of sanitary landfills.PloS one · 2024Article
- Metal pollution in the topsoil of lands adjacent to Sahiwal Coal Fired Power Plant (SCFPP) in Sahiwal, Pakistan.PloS one · 2024Article
- Article
- The effect of combined pollution by PAHs and heavy metals on the topsoil microbial communities of Spolic Technosols of the lake Atamanskoe, Southern Russia.Environmental geochemistry and health · 2022Article
- Special Issue "Reclamation of polluted soils for food production and human health: part 1".Environmental geochemistry and health · 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
11 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
The combustion of solid fuel at power plants pollutes adjacent areas with potentially toxic elements (PTEs), which increases risks to public health in the vicinity of these facilities. The proposed paper presents the results of a geochemical study of PTEs (Cr, Mn, Ni, Cu, Zn, Cd, and Pb) contamination in the vicinity of Novocherkassk Power Plant (NPP) as it relates to environmental and human health risks. The impact zone of NPP is pronounced for a distance of approximately 7 km northwest of the enterprise-the second largest coal power plant in Southern Russia. Data from monitoring sites lead us to conclude that spatial patterns of soil pollution are strongly influenced by the peculiarities of local atmospheric circulation, while the characteristics of soils within the study area play a secondary role. The highest levels of PTEs and their exchangeable forms exceed both regional background and sanitary and hygienic standards within a radius of 3 km to the west of the plant, which corresponds to a zone of soils contaminated with Cr, Ni, Cu, Zn, Cd, and Pb. The carcinogenic risk to human health slightly exceeds the permissible standard of 1 × 10
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.