Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34437625›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2021

Systematic review of predictive models of microbial water quality at freshwater recreational beaches.

Cole Heasley, J Johanna Sanchez, Jordan Tustin, Ian Young

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Recreational water illness in Canada: a changing risk landscape in the context of climate change.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2022
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Region-Specific Associations between Environmental Factors andInternational journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    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

4 authors.

Cole HeasleySchool of Occupational and Public Health, Ryerson University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-1780-9856
J Johanna SanchezSchool of Occupational and Public Health, Ryerson University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Jordan TustinSchool of Occupational and Public Health, Ryerson University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Ian YoungSchool of Occupational and Public Health, Ryerson University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-5575-5174

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Monitoring of fecal indicator bacteria at recreational waters is an important public health measure to minimize water-borne disease, however traditional culture methods for quantifying bacteria can take 18-24 hours to obtain a result. To support real-time notifications of water quality, models using environmental variables have been created to predict indicator bacteria levels on the day of sampling. We conducted a systematic review of predictive models of fecal indicator bacteria at freshwater recreational sites in temperate climates to identify and describe the existing approaches, trends, and their performance to inform beach water management policies. We conducted a comprehensive search strategy, including five databases and grey literature, screened abstracts for relevance, and extracted data using structured forms. Data were descriptively summarized. A total of 53 relevant studies were identified. Most studies (n = 44, 83%) were conducted in the United States and evaluated water quality using E. coli as fecal indicator bacteria (n = 46, 87%). Studies were primarily conducted in lakes (n = 40, 75%) compared to rivers (n = 13, 25%). The most commonly reported predictive model-building method was multiple linear regression (n = 37, 70%). Frequently used predictors in best-fitting models included rainfall (n = 39, 74%), turbidity (n = 31, 58%), wave height (n = 24, 45%), and wind speed and direction (n = 25, 47%, and n = 23, 43%, respectively). Of the 19 (36%) studies that measured accuracy, predictive models averaged an 81.0% accuracy, and all but one were more accurate than traditional methods. Limitations identifed by risk-of-bias assessment included not validating models (n = 21, 40%), limited reporting of whether modelling assumptions were met (n = 40, 75%), and lack of reporting on handling of missing data (n = 37, 70%). Additional research is warranted on the utility and accuracy of more advanced predictive modelling methods, such as Bayesian networks and artificial neural networks, which were investigated in comparatively fewer studies and creating risk of bias tools for non-medical predictive modelling.

Indexed as

Bathing BeachesEnvironmental MonitoringModels, TheoreticalWater MicrobiologyWater QualityFresh WaterHumansPublication BiasPublicationsRiskSeasonsSwimming

Identifiers

PMID34437625
PMCPMC8389397

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.