Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33818825›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental toxicology and chemistry2022

Ecological Risk Assessment of Pharmaceuticals in the Transboundary Vecht River (Germany and The Netherlands).

Daniel J Duarte, Gunnar Niebaum, Volker Lämmchen, Eri van Heijnsbergen, Rik Oldenkamp, Lucia Hernández-Leal, Heike Schmitt, Ad M J Ragas, Jörg Klasmeier

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental toxicology and chemistry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Human health risk assessment of pharmaceuticals in the European Vecht River.Integrated environmental assessment and management · 2022
    Article
  3. (Antibiotic-Resistant)Environmental science & technology · 2022
    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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Daniel J DuarteInstitute for Water & Wetland Research, Department of Environmental Science, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-1147-8125
Gunnar NiebaumInstitute of Environmental Systems Research, Osnabrück University, Osnabrück, Germany.
Volker LämmchenInstitute of Environmental Systems Research, Osnabrück University, Osnabrück, Germany.
Eri van HeijnsbergenWetsus, European Centre of Excellence for Sustainable Water Technology, Leeuwarden, The Netherlands.
Rik OldenkampDepartment of Global Health, Amsterdam Institute for Global Health and Development, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Lucia Hernández-LealWetsus, European Centre of Excellence for Sustainable Water Technology, Leeuwarden, The Netherlands.
Heike SchmittWetsus, European Centre of Excellence for Sustainable Water Technology, Leeuwarden, The Netherlands.
Ad M J RagasInstitute for Water & Wetland Research, Department of Environmental Science, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Jörg KlasmeierInstitute of Environmental Systems Research, Osnabrück University, Osnabrück, Germany.
Osnabrück University · DERadboud University Nijmegen · NLAmsterdam Institute for Global Health and Development · NLUtrecht University · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Millions of people rely on active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) to prevent and cure a wide variety of illnesses in humans and animals, which has led to a steadily increasing consumption of APIs across the globe and concurrent releases of APIs into the environment. In the environment, APIs can have a detrimental impact on wildlife, particularly aquatic wildlife. Therefore, it is essential to assess their potential adverse effects to aquatic ecosystems. The European Water Framework Directive sets out that risk assessment should be performed at the catchment level, crossing borders where needed. The present study defines ecological risk profiles for surface water concentrations of 8 APIs (carbamazepine, ciprofloxacin, cyclophosphamide, diclofenac, erythromycin, 17α-ethinylestradiol, metformin, and metoprolol) in the Vecht River, a transboundary river that crosses several German and Dutch regions. Ultimately, 3 main goals were achieved: 1) the geo-referenced estimation of API concentrations in surface water using the geography-referenced regional exposure assessment tool for European rivers; 2) the derivation of new predicted-no-effect concentrations for 7 of the studied APIs, of which 3 were lower than previously derived values; and 3) the creation of detailed spatially explicit ecological risk profiles of APIs under 2 distinct water flow scenarios. Under average flow conditions, carbamazepine, diclofenac, and 17α-ethinylestradiol were systematically estimated to surpass safe ecological concentration thresholds in at least 68% of the catchment's water volume. This increases to 98% under dry summer conditions. Environ Toxicol Chem 2022;41:648-662. © 2021 The Authors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of SETAC.

Indexed as

RiversWater Pollutants, ChemicalAnimalsCarbamazepineDiclofenacEcosystemEnvironmental MonitoringHumansNetherlandsPharmaceutical PreparationsRisk AssessmentWaterCarbamazepineDiclofenacPharmaceutical PreparationsWaterWater Pollutants, ChemicalEcological risk assessmentEnvironmental modelingGeographic information systemsGeo-referenced modelingPharmaceuticalsSurface waterToxic effectsWater quality

Identifiers

PMID33818825
PMCPMC9290585
OpenAlexW3140661904

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.