ArticleWIREs. Water
The lead and copper rule: Limitations and lessons learned from Newark, New Jersey.
Article in WIREs. Water. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Perspective on Electrochemical Lead Detection: Distributed Sensing to Address Unevenly Distributed Risk.ECS sensors plus · 2026Article
- Inclusive study of peanut shells derived activated carbon as an adsorbent for removal of lead and methylene blue from water.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Flint, Michigan reignited the public discourse surrounding lead contamination in drinking water with Newark, New Jersey recently experiencing its own lead-in-water crisis. Following Flint's experience, the Environmental Protection Agency proposed changes to the Lead and Copper Rule (LCR), but these changes may not produce better detection of contamination. LCR testing requirements were evaluated for their ability to predict or identify problems from the recent (2015-2019) Newark lead exceedance data. LCR compliance and water quality data were obtained from the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) website. Between 2002 and 2015, Newark sampled on a reduced sampling plan (50 samples once every 3 years), as required, for lead and copper. These samples were divided between Newark's two water sources with uneven sampling distribution across the city, further limiting the potential to identify a risk of lead in drinking water. Results suggest a more rigorous testing requirement may have identified the problem sooner. Limitations related to the LCR that prevented Newark water suppliers from earlier detection of lead risk will continue under the revised LCR. This article is categorized under:Engineering Water > Water, Health, and SanitationScience of Water > Water Quality.
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.