ReviewEnvironmental science and pollution research international2026
Evaluating human health risk assessment tools for contaminated soil: a comparative review.
Review in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Source Apportionment and Health Risk Assessment of Heavy Metals in Groundwater Around Typical Karst Region of the Lower Yellow River, China.Water environment research : a research publication of the Water Environment Federation · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
At the European Union level, approximately 60-70% of soil is in unhealthy or degraded conditions. One of the soil threats is the legacy of industrial pollution, as historic industrial pollutants discharged into the ground continue to pose risks to both the environment and human health. As part of the legislative measures adopted in the late 90 s, Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) was introduced as a standardized method for evaluating risks associated with contaminated sites. To support the quantification of these risks, various software tool models were developed. This study reviews 12 HHRA tools for contaminated sites developed across different countries. First, an overview of national legislative frameworks concerning contaminated sites, with a particular focus on the use of HHRA as a decision-making tool, is provided. Subsequently, the study compares and discusses the methodologies adopted by each tool, the exposure pathways and receptors considered, the integrated contaminant databases, and additional features provided by the models. The comparison highlights the diversity of functionalities offered by the different tools, reflecting a lack of harmonization among national regulations regarding contaminated site management. Beyond the need for a harmonized approach at the EU level, potential future developments include the design of more user-friendly interfaces capable of expanding exposure scenarios, updating contaminant lists (including emerging pollutants such as PFAS), integrating uncertainty analysis, incorporating Geographic Information System (GIS)-based visualizations, and integrating artificial intelligence (AI)/machine learning (ML).
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.