Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37254909›Full record

ReviewJournal of water and health2023

Online dashboards for SARS-CoV-2 wastewater data need standard best practices: An environmental health communication agenda.

Colleen C Naughton, Rochelle H Holm, Nancy J Lin, Brooklyn P James, Ted Smith

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of water and health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Research gaps and priorities for quantitative microbial risk assessment (QMRA).Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Where Does Wastewater-Based Epidemiology Fall in Medical Student Education?Journal of medical education and curricular development
    Article
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

5 authors.

Colleen C NaughtonDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of California Merced, Merced, CA 95343, USA.
Rochelle H HolmChristina Lee Brown Envirome Institute, School of Medicine, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY 40202, USA E-mail: rochelle.holm@louisville.edu.
Nancy J LinMaterial Measurement Laboratory, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD 20899, USA.
Brooklyn P JamesDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of California Merced, Merced, CA 95343, USA.
Ted SmithChristina Lee Brown Envirome Institute, School of Medicine, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY 40202, USA E-mail: rochelle.holm@louisville.edu.

Funding

Superfund Training CoreP42ES023716 · NIEHS · UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE · PI HEIN, DAVID W · 2017 to 2025
$18.1M
University of Louisville Center for Integrative Environmental Health SciencesP30ES030283 · NIEHS · UNIVERSITY OF LOUISVILLE · PI Amanda Jo LeBlanc · 2020 to 2026
$10.0M
NIEHS NIH HHS P30 ES030283NIEHS NIH HHS P42 ES023716
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the benefits of wastewater surveillance to supplement clinical data. Numerous online information dashboards have been rapidly, and typically independently, developed to communicate environmental surveillance data to public health officials and the public. In this study, we review dashboards presenting SARS-CoV-2 wastewater data and propose a path toward harmonization and improved risk communication. A list of 127 dashboards representing 27 countries was compiled. The variability was high and encompassed aspects including the graphics used for data presentation (e.g., line/bar graphs, maps, and tables), log versus linear scale, and 96 separate ways of labeling SARS-CoV-2 wastewater concentrations. Globally, dashboard presentations also differed by region. Approximately half of the dashboards presented clinical case data, and 25% presented variant monitoring. Only 30% of dashboards provided downloadable source data. While any single dashboard is likely useful in its own context and locality, the high variation across dashboards at best prevents optimal use of wastewater surveillance data on a broader geographical scale and at worst could lead to risk communication issues and the potential for public health miscommunication. There is a great opportunity to improve scientific communication through the adoption of uniform data presentation conventions, standards, and best practices in this field.

Indexed as

COVID-19Health CommunicationEnvironmental HealthHumansPandemicsSARS-CoV-2WastewaterWastewater-Based Epidemiological MonitoringWastewater

Identifiers

PMID37254909
PMCPMC10846915

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.