ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2020
Risk assessment to health and human safety in an urban basin in northeastern Brazil.
Article in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Groundwater contamination risks and land use changes in a typical Agreste/Caatinga transition zone in northeastern Brazil.Environmental monitoring and assessment · 2026Article
- Decontamination of real urban sewage-comparison between Fenton and electrochemical oxidation.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this work was to carry out a risk assessment of human health and safety associated with the dangers encountered in an urban basin located in Campina Grande, the State of Paraíba, northeastern Brazil, called the Prado Basin, through the method of failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA). As a subsidy to the study, laboratory analyses of drainage water were performed at eight points distributed along the Prado Canal, a canal of the study area, to verify its quality and subsequent influence on the population's health. It was verified that the risk of effluent discharge pollution stood out from the others, accounting for almost 50% of the total risk of the system. In the risk ranges, this was classified in points six and seven as critical and in points two, three, and four as high risk, which implies the urgency of adopting measures that minimize or resolve this risk at these points. In general, it was found that points six and seven totaled the highest sum of individual risks, suggesting the adoption of short-term preventive and corrective measures in the aforementioned points.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32700277What 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.