Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33481909›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

The utility of Escherichia coli as a contamination indicator for rural drinking water: Evidence from whole genome sequencing.

Saskia Nowicki, Zaydah R deLaurent, Etienne P de Villiers, George Githinji, Katrina J Charles

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
12.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 86 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Molecular identification ofOpen veterinary journal · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Assessment ofJournal of water and health · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Assessing fecal contamination from human and environmental sources usingmedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Saskia NowickiSchool of Geography and the Environment, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-9011-6901
Zaydah R deLaurentKEMRI-Wellcome Trust Research Programme, Centre for Geographic Medicine Research-Coast, Kilifi, Kenya.
Etienne P de VilliersKEMRI-Wellcome Trust Research Programme, Centre for Geographic Medicine Research-Coast, Kilifi, Kenya.
George GithinjiKEMRI-Wellcome Trust Research Programme, Centre for Geographic Medicine Research-Coast, Kilifi, Kenya.
Katrina J CharlesSchool of Geography and the Environment, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Kenya Medical Research Institute · KEUniversity of Oxford · GBPwani University · KE

Funding

Department of Health 17/63/82
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Across the water sector, Escherichia coli is the preferred microbial water quality indicator and current guidance upholds that it indicates recent faecal contamination. This has been challenged, however, by research demonstrating growth of E. coli in the environment. In this study, we used whole genome sequencing to investigate the links between E. coli and recent faecal contamination in drinking water. We sequenced 103 E. coli isolates sampled from 9 water supplies in rural Kitui County, Kenya, including points of collection (n = 14) and use (n = 30). Biomarkers for definitive source tracking remain elusive, so we analysed the phylogenetic grouping, multi-locus sequence types (MLSTs), allelic diversity, and virulence and antimicrobial resistance (AMR) genes of the isolates for insight into their likely source. Phylogroup B1, which is generally better adapted to water environments, is dominant in our samples (n = 69) and allelic diversity differences (z = 2.12, p = 0.03) suggest that naturalised populations may be particularly relevant at collection points with lower E. coli concentrations (<50 / 100mL). The strains that are more likely to have originated from human and/or recent faecal contamination (n = 50), were found at poorly protected collection points (4 sites) or at points of use (12 sites). We discuss the difficulty of interpreting health risk from E. coli grab samples, especially at household level, and our findings support the use of E. coli risk categories and encourage monitoring that accounts for sanitary conditions and temporal variability.

Indexed as

Water QualityWater SupplyDrinking WaterEscherichia coliHumansKenyaWhole Genome SequencingDrinking Water

Identifiers

PMID33481909
PMCPMC7822521
OpenAlexW3122383252

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.