Mercury pollution in the coastal Urmia aquifer in northwestern Iran: potential sources, mobility, and toxicity.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

1. Trusted artificial intelligence for environmental assessments: An explainable high-precision model with multi-source big data.Environmental science and ecotechnology · 2024
   Article
2. Potentially toxic elemental contamination in Wainivesi River, Fiji impacted by gold-mining activities using chemometric tools and SOM analysis.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2022
   Article
3. Comprehensive assessment of water quality and associated health risk by using physicochemical quality indices and multivariate analysis in Terme River, Turkey.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2021
   Review

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

4 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

Indexed as