ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2024
Identifying and Responding to Lead in Drinking Water in a University Setting.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Lead Poisoning in the Americas: Sources, Regulations, Health Impacts, and Molecular Mechanisms.Journal of xenobiotics · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Lead is an established neurotoxicant, and it has known associations with adverse neurodevelopmental and reproductive outcomes. Exposure to lead at any level is unsafe, and the United States (US) has enacted various federal and state legislations to regulate lead levels in drinking water in K-12 schools and childcare facilities; however, no regulations exist for higher education settings. Upon the discovery of lead in drinking water fixtures in the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC-CH) campus, a cross-campus water testing network and sampling plan was developed and deployed. The campaign was based on the US Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) 3Ts (Training, Testing, and Taking Action) guidance. The seven-month campaign involved 5954 tests on 3825 drinking water fixtures across 265 buildings. A total of 502 (8.43%) tests showed lead above the limit of detection (1 part per billion, ppb), which represented 422 (11.03%) fixtures. Fewer than 1.5% of the tests were above the EPA action level for public water systems (15 ppb). In conclusion, systematic testing of all the fixtures across campus was required to identify localized contamination, and each entity in the cross-campus network undertook necessary roles to generate a successful testing campaign. UNC-CH established preventative measures to test drinking water fixtures every three years, which provide a framework for other higher education institutions in responding to lead contamination.
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.