ArticleScientific reports2025
Machine learning-assisted source identification and probabilistic ecological-health risk assessment of heavy metal(loid)s in urban park soils.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Applications of Machine Learning in the Research of Heavy Metal(loid)s-Related Risk: A Scoping Review of Methodology.Toxics · 2026Review
- Transforming soil decontamination: the role and prospects of nanotechnological remediation.RSC advances · 2026Review
- A statistical approach to model soil microbiota versus heavy metals: a case study on soil samples from Foggia, Southern Italy.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Application of Machine Learning in Food Safety Risk Assessment.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The accumulation of heavy metal(loid)s (HMs) in the soils of urban parks in industrial cities has raised global concerns because of their environmental and health impacts. However, traditional deterministic assessments commonly overlook uncertainties in pollution evaluation, failing to accurately quantify source-specific contributions and associated risks. This study combines multivariate statistical methods, machine learning techniques, and positive matrix factorization (PMF) with Monte Carlo simulation to investigate HM sources, probabilistic pollution levels, source-based ecological risks, and population-specific health hazards in seven urban parks in a nickel-based mining city in China. Results showed that average concentrations of Cd (0.53 mg/kg), Cr (77.72 mg/kg), Cu (171.15 mg/kg), Hg (0.03 mg/kg), Ni (125.42 mg/kg), Pb (27.13 mg/kg), and Zn (81.97 mg/kg) exceeded their background values, except for As (11.85 mg/kg), particularly for Cd, Cu, and Ni, with exceedance rates of 98.46%, 100.00%, and 100.00%, respectively. Probabilistic assessments revealed that pollution levels were particularly high due to Cd, Cu, and Ni. Source apportionment using PMF, correlation analysis, hierarchical cluster analysis, and super-clustering of self-organizing maps identified fertilizers and pesticides (19.33%), industrial atmospheric deposition (21.13%), mining and agrochemicals (16.41%), and mining and transport activities (43.13%) as the major pollution sources. Probabilistic ecological risk assessments showed significant risks from Cd, Hg, and Cu. Non-carcinogenic risks were negligible, while carcinogenic risks were cautionary, especially for children. Mining and transportation activities were the main contributors to ecological risks, while fertilizers, pesticides, and Ni were the primary health risk factors. This study provides a robust framework to improve the accuracy of risk evaluation and offers valuable guidance for targeted interventions and sustainable management of urban soils.
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.