ReviewCurrent opinion in environmental science & health2022
Presence and persistence of SARS-CoV-2 in aquatic environments: A mini-review.
Review in Current opinion in environmental science & health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Environmental and microbial factors shaping SARS-CoV-2 RNA decay in wastewater: insights from batch tests and a lab-scale sewer pipeline simulator.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Microbiological and decomposition analysis of mass mink burial sites during the COVID-19 pandemic.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Persistence and free chlorine disinfection of human coronaviruses and their surrogates in water.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2024Article
- Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in Wastewater Associated with Scientific Stations in Antarctica and Possible Risk for Wildlife.Microorganisms · 2024Article
- Persistence of SARS-CoV-2 and its surrogate, bacteriophage Phi6, on surfaces and in water.Applied and environmental microbiology · 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
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The introduction of SARS-CoV-2 into water bodies via sewage raises public health concerns. For the assessment of public health risks, it is necessary to know the presence and persistence of infectious SARS-CoV-2 in water and wastewater. The present mini-review documents the occurrence and decay rates of viable infectious SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV-2 RNA in different water matrices including wastewater, river water, groundwater, tap water, and seawater. Persistence of viable SARS-CoV-2 is mainly temperature dependent. A rapid inactivation of infectious SARS-CoV-2 is found in river water, sea water, and wastewater compared to tap water. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was found to be considerably more stable than infectious SARS-CoV-2, indicating that the environmental detection of RNA alone does not prove risk of infection. Persistence assays need to consider physicochemical and biological water composition as well as the effect of detergents, enzymes, and filtering particulate matter.
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.