ReviewEnvironmental geochemistry and health2025
Environmental Risk Assessment of Trace Metal Pollution: A Statistical Perspective.
Review in Environmental geochemistry and health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Water-specific toxicity factor and index for heavy metal risk assessment: application to urban lakes in Chennai, India.Environmental geochemistry and health · 2026Article
- Perspective on health and ecological risk assessments of potentially toxic metal(loid)s using aquatic biodiversity as biomonitoring indicators.Toxicology reports · 2025Review
- Environmental Risk Assessment of Metals in Groundwater in an Area of Jiujiang City, Jiangxi Province, China.Toxics · 2025Article
- Nanotechnology for fungal pathogen control in crops: innovations, public health impacts, and disease prevention.Frontiers in fungal biology · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Trace metal pollution is primarily driven by industrial, agricultural, and mining activities and presents complex environmental challenges with significant implications for ecological and human health. Traditional methods of environmental risk assessment (ERA) often fall short in addressing the intricate dynamics of trace metals, necessitating the adoption of advanced statistical techniques. This review focuses on integrating contemporary statistical methods, such as Bayesian modeling, machine learning, and geostatistics, into ERA frameworks to improve risk assessment precision, reliability, and interpretability. Using these innovative approaches, either alone or preferably in combination, provides a better understanding of the mechanisms of trace metal transport, bioavailability, and their ecological impacts can be achieved while also predicting future contamination patterns. The use of spatial and temporal analysis, coupled with uncertainty quantification, enhances the assessment of contamination hotspots and their associated risks. Integrating statistical models with ecotoxicology further strengthens the ability to evaluate ecological and human health risks, providing a broad framework for managing trace metal pollution. As new contaminants emerge and existing pollutants evolve in their behavior, the need for adaptable, data-driven ERA methodologies becomes ever more pressing. The advancement of statistical tools and interdisciplinary collaboration will be essential for developing more effective environmental management strategies and informing policy decisions. Ultimately, the future of ERA lies in integrating diverse data sources, advanced analytical techniques, and stakeholder engagement, ensuring a more resilient approach to mitigating trace metal pollution and protecting environmental and public health.
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.