Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41240893›Full record

ArticleThe Science of the total environment2025

Predicting arsenic and manganese contamination in private well water with Machine Learning: An integrated analysis of geologic, well construction, and permitting data.

Alexis Payton, Cailee E Harrington, Sarah L Miller, Traci Colley, Marc L Serre, Rebecca C Fry, Robert E Austin, Owen W Duckworth, Lauren A Eaves, Julia E Rager

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Science of the total environment, 2025. 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

10 authors.

Alexis PaytonCenter for Environmental Medicine, Asthma, and Lung Biology, School of Medicine, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA; Department of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, Gillings School of Global Public Health, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Cailee E HarringtonDepartment of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, Gillings School of Global Public Health, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Sarah L MillerCurriculum in Toxicology and Environmental Medicine, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Traci ColleyUnion County Environmental Health, Monroe, NC, USA.
Marc L SerreDepartment of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, Gillings School of Global Public Health, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA; The Institute for Environmental Health Solutions, Gillings School of Global Public Health, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Rebecca C FryDepartment of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, Gillings School of Global Public Health, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA; Curriculum in Toxicology and Environmental Medicine, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA; The Institute for Environmental Health Solutions, Gillings School of Global Public Health, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Robert E AustinDepartment of Crop and Soil Sciences, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA.
Owen W DuckworthDepartment of Crop and Soil Sciences, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA.
Lauren A EavesDepartment of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, Gillings School of Global Public Health, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA; The Institute for Environmental Health Solutions, Gillings School of Global Public Health, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. Electronic address: laeaves@live.unc.edu.
Julia E RagerCenter for Environmental Medicine, Asthma, and Lung Biology, School of Medicine, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA; Department of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, Gillings School of Global Public Health, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA; Curriculum in Toxicology and Environmental Medicine, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA; The Institute for Environmental Health Solutions, Gillings School of Global Public Health, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. Electronic address: jrager@unc.edu.

Funding

The UNC Chapel Hill Superfund Research Program (UNC-SRP)P42ES031007 · NIEHS · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI Kathleen M Gray · 2020 to 2026
$22.2M
Translational Research Support CoreP30ES025128 · NIEHS · NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY RALEIGH · PI Sue Fenton · 2015 to 2026
$18.3M
TOXICOLOGYT32ES007126 · NIEHS · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI ILONA JASPERS, Bernard E. Weissman · 1985 to 2026
$13.0M
NIEHS NIH HHS P30 ES025128NIEHS NIH HHS P42 ES031007NIEHS NIH HHS T32 ES007126
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Exposure to arsenic (As) and manganese (Mn) through private well water is a pressing public health issue in North Carolina (NC). The goal of this study was to identify geologic, geographic, well construction, and water characteristics (e.g. pH) that are predictive of As and Mn concentrations in private wells. Data collected from over 700 private well water tests from Union County, NC, were analyzed, including thirteen variables spanning well construction and water characteristics that were joined with geologic and geographic features. These data were used to develop random forest (RF) and support vector machine (SVM) models to predict whether wells exceeded their respective maximum contaminant level (MCL) or health advisory level (HAL) (10 ppb for As; 300 ppb for Mn) using four different variable combinations (use cases). Major findings included that As and Mn contamination was prevalent with 18 % and 12 % of tested wells exceeding the MCL and HAL, respectively. Most algorithms across the use cases had generally high predictivity (AUC > 0.7). The top performing models used a linear kernel SVM that leveraged all thirteen variables for As (AUC = 0.80) and the geologic/geographic variables for Mn (AUC = 0.74). When classifying As concentrations, longitude, flow rate, pH, and land use were the most important predictors of contamination. When classifying Mn concentrations, casing depth, longitude, and latitude were the most important predictors. In conclusion, these findings can be used to inform the identification of private wells at-risk for metal contamination, prioritize intervention efforts for existing wells, and provide safer parameters for newly constructed wells.

Indexed as

ArsenicEnvironmental MonitoringMachine LearningManganeseWater Pollutants, ChemicalNorth CarolinaWater WellsArsenicManganeseWater Pollutants, ChemicalArsenicMachine learningManganeseMetal contaminationWater quality

Identifiers

PMID41240893
PMCPMC12755026

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.