ArticleBMC public health2022
Risk perceptions of drinking bottled vs. tap water in a low-income community on the US-Mexico Border.
Article in BMC public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Socioeconomic and attitudinal predictors of bottled water use among lower-income households in Southwest Virginia.Journal of water and health · 2026Article
- Community engagement for water reuse technologies for environmental health risk assessment and management.Water Reuse · 2026Article
- How water quality affects perceived risk of waterborne disease: evidence from Zapopan, Mexico.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2026Article
- Hydration Knowledge, Water Consumption, and Attitudes Toward Drinking Water Quality Among Adults in Romania: A Cross-Sectional Study.Nutrients · 2026Article
- Public risk perceptions of advanced water purification in an arid urban region of the U.S. southwest: A mixed methods study.The Science of the total environment · 2025Article
- Sustainable HEalthy Diet practices: a cross-sectional analysis of an adult Greek sample.Nutrition journal · 2025Article
- Microbiological quality of drinking water from water dispensers.AIMS microbiology · 2025Review
- Exploring barriers and facilitators to water availability and accessibility, and potential strategies for improving water accessibility and children's intake in family childcare homes: a qualitative study.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Article
- Article
- Recruitment strategies in marginalized industries for occupational health research: an example in a pilot study of cleaning staff during COVID-19.Annals of work exposures and health · 2024Article
- Article
- Measured and Modeled Comparisons of Chemical and Microbial Contaminants in Tap and Bottled Water in a US-Mexico Border Community.ACS ES&T water · 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
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPrevious studies have shown that low-income Latinos generally drink bottled water over tap water and might be at increased risks for cavities from unfluoridated bottled water. In order to better design interventions, it is important to understand the risk perceptions of this unique high-risk yet historically marginalized group.
methodsWe interviewed low-income Latino households (n = 90) from Nogales, Arizona who primarily drink bottled water and asked them to evaluate potential health risks of drinking tap water compared to 16 other voluntary activities. Unpaired t-tests were used to determine if statistically significant (α = 0.05) differences occurred in perceived risk by drinking-water source and differences among demographic groups in their level of (dis)agreement with statements regarding tap or bottled water safety. To assess significant differences (α = 0.05) in perceived risks and voluntariness to engage in a number of activities, including drinking local tap water and drinking water in different geographic regions, a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by Scheffe's post-hoc test (a conservative post-hoc test) with adjustment for the number of pairwise comparisons was used.
resultsParticipants viewed bottled water to be significantly safer to consume than tap water (p < 0.001). On a Likert scale from 1 (low risk) to 5 (high risk), "drinking tap water in Nogales, Arizona" received an average score of 4.7, which was significantly higher than the average perceived risk of drinking San Francisco, California tap water (µ = 3.4, p < 0.001), and as risky as drinking and driving (µ = 4.8, p = 1.00) and drinking Nogales, Sonora, Mexico tap water (µ = 4.8, p = 1.00). Ninety-eight percent of participants feared that drinking local tap water could result in illness, 79% did not drink their water because of fear of microbial and chemical contamination and 73% would drink their water if they knew it was safe regardless of taste.
conclusionsThese results suggest that fear of illness from tap-water consumption is an important contributing factor to increased bottled water use. Future efforts should focus on the development of educational and outreach efforts to assess the safety and risks associated with tap-water consumption.
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.