ArticleJournal of water and health2025
Analysis of heavy metal contamination in groundwater and associated probabilistic human health risk assessment using Monte Carlo simulation: A case study in Gaya, Bihar.
Article in Journal of water and health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Groundwater compliant with drinking water standards poses a "silent risk" of cumulative health hazards.Environmental geochemistry and health · 2026Article
- From contamination to decision-making: integrated indices and multivariate analysis for groundwater health risk assessment.Journal of water and health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The occurrence of heavy metal contamination in groundwater poses significant health risks through ingestion and dermal exposure, with potential links to cancer and other diseases. This study evaluated groundwater samples for 10 heavy metals (Al, As, Cr, Cu, Cd, Fe, Mn, Ni, Pb, and Zn) using ICP-OES. While cadmium and chromium levels were within acceptable limits prescribed by the Bureau of Indian Standards, aluminum and iron exceeded these limits in 56 and 58% of samples, respectively. Other metals surpassed limits in 2-20% of cases. Health risk analysis revealed non-carcinogenic risks for 28% of adults and 44% of children, alongside carcinogenic risks from arsenic (36% of samples) and nickel (46% of samples), especially affecting children. Sensitivity analysis highlighted heavy metal concentration as the key variable influencing risk, and principal component analysis suggested geogenic sources, like rock weathering, as major contributors to contamination. Despite these risks, the heavy metal pollution index remained within acceptable limits for all samples. The study emphasizes the necessity for continuous monitoring and targeted mitigation strategies to address heavy metal contamination and protect public health.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40448465What 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.