ArticleBJUI compass2022
Mineral content variations between Australian tap and bottled water in the context of urolithiasis.
Article in BJUI compass, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring the Potential Benefits of Natural Calcium-Rich Mineral Waters for Health and Wellness: A Systematic Review.Nutrients · 2023Pooled it
- Effects of Gas Type, Oil, Salts and Detergent on Formation and Stability of Air and Carbon Dioxide Bubbles Produced by Using a Nanobubble Generator.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Shining a little light on peer review debates.BJUI compass · 2022Article
- Mineral content variations between Australian tap and bottled water in the context of urolithiasis.BJUI compass · 2022Article
- Variation in Tap Water Mineral Content in the United Kingdom: Is It Relevant for Kidney Stone Disease?Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The objective of this study is to investigate the variations in mineral content of tap drinking water across major Australian cities, compared with bottled still and sparkling water, and discuss the possible implications on kidney stone disease (KSD). Materials and Methods: The mineral composition of public tap water from 10 metropolitan and regional Australian cities was compared using the drinking water quality reports published from 2019 to 2021 by the respective water service utilities providers. Specifically, average levels of calcium, bicarbonate, magnesium, sodium, potassium, and sulphates were compared with published mineral content data from bottled still and sparkling drinking water in Australia. Results: The median or mean (depending on report output) mineral composition was highly variable for calcium (range 1.3 to 20.33 mg/L), magnesium (range 1.1 to 11.2 mg/L), bicarbonate (range 12 to 79 mg/L), sodium (range 3 to 47.1 mg/L), potassium (range 0.4 to 3.23 mg/L) and (sulphates range <1 to 37.4 mg/L). Calcium, magnesium and bicarbonate levels in tap water were lower than in bottled sparkling water. Consumption of 3 L/day of the most calcium rich tap water would fulfil 4.7% of the RDI, compared with 8.7% with bottled sparkling water. Consumption of 3 L of the most magnesium rich tap water would fulfil 8% of the RDI, compared with 13.6% with bottled sparkling water. Conclusion: The mineral content of tap drinking water varied substantially across major Australian city centres. Bottled sparkling water on average provided higher levels of calcium, bicarbonate and magnesium and may be preferred for prevention of calcium oxalate stones. These findings may assist counselling of patients with KSD depending on geographic location in the context of other modifiable risk factors and 24-h urine analysis results.
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.