Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35634037›Full record

ArticleMicroplastics and nanoplastics2022

Development and application of a health-based framework for informing regulatory action in relation to exposure of microplastic particles in California drinking water.

Scott Coffin, Hans Bouwmeester, Susanne Brander, Pauliina Damdimopoulou, Todd Gouin, Ludovic Hermabessiere, Elaine Khan, Albert A Koelmans, Christine L Lemieux, Katja Teerds and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Microplastics and nanoplastics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Systematic review of potential developmental and reproductive toxicity of microplastics.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. The Toxicity of Microplastics Explorer (ToMEx) 2.0.Microplastics and nanoplastics · 2025
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Adding Depth to Microplastics.Environmental science & technology · 2023
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

13 authors.

Scott CoffinCalifornia State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA USA.
Hans BouwmeesterDivision of Toxicology, Wageningen University & Research, Wageningen, Netherlands.
Susanne BranderFisheries, Wildlife, and Conservation Sciences Dept, Coastal Oregon Marine Experiment Station, Oregon State University, Newport, OR USA.
Pauliina DamdimopoulouDivision of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Clinical Science, Intervention and Technology, Karolinska Institutet and Karolinska University Hospital Huddinge, 14186 Stockholm, Sweden.
Todd GouinTG Environmental Research, Sharnbrook, MK44 1PL UK.
Ludovic HermabessiereDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON Canada.
Elaine KhanCalifornia Office of Environmental Health and Hazard Assessment, Sacramento, CA USA.
Albert A KoelmansAquatic Ecology and Water Quality Management Group, Wageningen University & Research, Wageningen, Netherlands.
Christine L LemieuxSafe Environments Directorate, Health Canada, Water and Air Quality Bureau, Ottawa, ON Canada.
Katja TeerdsDepartment of Animal Sciences, Human and Animal Physiology, Wageningen University & Research, Wageningen, Netherlands.
Martin WagnerNorwegian University of Science & Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
Stephen B WeisbergSouthern California Coastal Water Research Project, Costa Mesa, CA USA.
Stephanie WrightEnvironmental Research Group, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, Sir Michael Uren Hub, 86 Wood Lane, London, W12 0BZ UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/R026521/1Medical Research Council MR/R026521/2
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Microplastics have been documented in drinking water, but their effects on human health from ingestion, or the concentrations at which those effects begin to manifest, are not established. Here, we report on the outcome of a virtual expert workshop conducted between October 2020 and October 2021 in which a comprehensive review of mammalian hazard studies was conducted. A key objective of this assessment was to evaluate the feasibility and confidence in deriving a human health-based threshold value to inform development of the State of California's monitoring and management strategy for microplastics in drinking water. A tiered approach was adopted to evaluate the quality and reliability of studies identified from a review of the peer-reviewed scientific literature. A total of 41 in vitro and 31 in vivo studies using mammals were identified and subjected to a Tier 1 screening and prioritization exercise, which was based on an evaluation of how each of the studies addressed various quality criteria. Prioritized studies were identified largely based on their application and reporting of dose-response relationships. Given that methods for extrapolating between in vitro and in vivo systems are currently lacking, only oral exposure in vivo studies were identified as fit-for-purpose within the context of this workshop. Twelve mammalian toxicity studies were prioritized and subjected to a Tier 2 qualitative evaluation by external experts. Of the 12 studies, 7 report adverse effects on male and female reproductive systems, while 5 reported effects on various other physiological endpoints. It is notable that the majority of studies (83%) subjected to Tier 2 evaluation report results from exposure to a single polymer type (polystyrene spheres), representing a size range of 0.040 to 20 µm. No single study met all desired quality criteria, but collectively toxicological effects with respect to biomarkers of inflammation and oxidative stress represented a consistent trend. While it was possible to derive a conservative screening level to inform monitoring activities, it was not possible to extrapolate a human-health-based threshold value for microplastics, which is largely due to concerns regarding the relative quality and reliability of current data, but also due to the inability to extrapolate data from studies using monodisperse plastic particles, such as polystyrene spheres to an environmentally relevant exposure of microplastics. Nevertheless, a conservative screening level value was used to estimate a volume of drinking water (1000 L) that could be used to support monitoring activities and improve our overall understanding of exposure in California's drinking water. In order to increase confidence in our ability to derive a human-health-based threshold value in the future, several research recommendations are provided, with an emphasis towards strengthening how toxicity studies should be conducted in the future and an improved understanding of human exposure to microplastics, insights critically important to better inform future risk assessments. Graphical abstract: Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s43591-022-00030-6.

Indexed as

Drinking waterHuman healthMicroplasticsNanoplasticsRisk assessment

Identifiers

PMID35634037
PMCPMC9132802

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.