ArticleGeoHealth2022
Using Community Science to Better Understand Lead Exposure Risks.
Article in GeoHealth, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- The nature and distribution of road sediment contaminants in the greater Las Vegas, Nevada area.Environmental monitoring and assessment · 2025Article
- Anthropogenic Metal Storage in Wetland Soils Across the Conterminous United States.Wetlands (Wilmington, N.C.) · 2025Article
- Article
- Neighborhood-scale lead (Pb) speciation in Akron, Ohio (USA) soils: primary sources, post-deposition diagenesis, and high concentrations of labile Pb.Environmental geochemistry and health · 2024Article
- Assessing lead exposure in U.S. pregnant women using biological and residential measurements.The Science of the total environment · 2023Article
- Direct Environmental Lead Detection by Photoluminescent Perovskite Formation with Nanogram Sensitivity.Environmental science & technology · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lead (Pb) is a neurotoxicant that particularly harms young children. Urban environments are often plagued with elevated Pb in soils and dusts, posing a health exposure risk from inhalation and ingestion of these contaminated media. Thus, a better understanding of where to prioritize risk screening and intervention is paramount from a public health perspective. We have synthesized a large national data set of Pb concentrations in household dusts from across the United States (U.S.), part of a community science initiative called "DustSafe." Using these results, we have developed a straightforward logistic regression model that correctly predicts whether Pb is elevated (>80 ppm) or low (<80 ppm) in household dusts 75% of the time. Additionally, our model estimated 18% false negatives for elevated Pb, displaying that there was a low probability of elevated Pb in homes being misclassified. Our model uses only variables of approximate housing age and whether there is peeling paint in the interior of the home, illustrating how a simple and successful Pb predictive model can be generated if researchers ask the right screening questions. Scanning electron microscopy supports a common presence of Pb paint in several dust samples with elevated bulk Pb concentrations, which explains the predictive power of housing age and peeling paint in the model. This model was also implemented into an interactive mobile app that aims to increase community-wide participation with Pb household screening. The app will hopefully provide greater awareness of Pb risks and a highly efficient way to begin mitigation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.