Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39044968›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2024

Assessing and predicting water quality index with key water parameters by machine learning models in coastal cities, China.

Jing Xu, Yuming Mo, Senlin Zhu, Jinran Wu, Guangqiu Jin, You-Gan Wang, Qingfeng Ji, Ling Li

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

8 authors.

Jing XuCollege of Hydraulic Science and Engineering, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou, China.
Yuming MoSchool of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, Jiangsu University of Science and Technology, Zhenjiang, China.
Senlin ZhuCollege of Hydraulic Science and Engineering, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou, China.
Jinran WuInstitute for Positive Psychology and Education, Australian Catholic University, North Sydney, Australia.
Guangqiu JinThe National Key Laboratory of Water Disaster Prevention, Hohai University, Nanjing, China.
You-Gan WangSchool of Mathematics and Physics, The University of Queensland, Queensland, Australia.
Qingfeng JiCollege of Hydraulic Science and Engineering, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou, China.
Ling LiKey Laboratory of Coastal Environment and Resources of Zhejiang Province (KLaCER), School of Engineering, Westlake University, Hangzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The water quality index (WQI) is a widely used tool for comprehensive assessment of river environments. However, its calculation involves numerous water quality parameters, making sample collection and laboratory analysis time-consuming and costly. This study aimed to identify key water parameters and the most reliable prediction models that could provide maximum accuracy using minimal indicators. Water quality from 2020 to 2023 were collected including nine biophysical and chemical indicators in seventeen rivers in Yancheng and Nantong, two coastal cities in Jiangsu Province, China, adjacent to the Yellow Sea. Linear regression and seven machine learning models (Artificial Neural Network (ANN), Self-Organizing Maps (SOM), K-Nearest Neighbor (KNN), Support Vector Machines (SVM), Random Forest (RF), Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGB) and Stochastic Gradient Boosting (SGB)) were developed to predict WQI using different groups of input variables based on correlation analysis. The results indicated that water quality improved from 2020 to 2022 but deteriorated in 2023, with inland stations exhibiting better conditions than coastal ones, particularly in terms of turbidity and nutrients. The water environment was comparatively better in Nantong than in Yancheng, with mean WQI values of approximately 55.3-72.0 and 56.4-67.3, respectively. The classifications "Good" and "Medium" accounted for 80 % of the records, with no instances of "Excellent" and 2 % classified as "Bad". The performance of all prediction models, except for SOM, improved with the addition of input variables, achieving R

Indexed as

Coastal citiesKey water parametersMachine learning modelsWater qualityWater quality index (WQI)

Identifiers

PMID39044968
PMCPMC11263670

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.