ArticleEnvironmental monitoring and assessment2026
Identification and quantification of PFAS in the tap water of a French City, Besançon.
Article in Environmental monitoring and assessment, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In France, information on per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in residential tap water is still limited or non-existent. In this study, we conducted a local survey to compare human exposure to PFAS in 28 private family households in a medium-sized French city (Besançon). We present the results on the identification and quantification of 65 PFAS substances in residential tap water. Concentrations of PFAS were assessed by a French accredited laboratory. A total of 74 tap water samples were analyzed, revealing the presence of 12 individual molecules, 8 of which are among the 20 regulated substances. Forty-one samples contained a mixture of 2 to 10 different PFAS substances, the most frequently quantified molecules being trifluoroacetic acid (100%), perfluorooctanoic acid (48.6%), perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (44.6%), perfluorobutanoic acid (27.0%), perfluoropentanoic acid (50.1%), and perfluorohexanoic acid (23.0%). The corresponding cumulative concentrations (sum of 65 substances) ranged from 440 ng/L to 3,805 ng/L, showing significant variability. However, in terms of regulations, all values were below the 100 ng/L limit for the sum of the 20 molecules. Trifluoroacetic acid, which is not on the regulatory PFAS list, was systematically found in all the water samples analyzed and the results clearly highlighted the dominance of this PFAS. In tap water, trifluoroacetic acid was quantified at concentrations ranging from 440 to 3,800 ng/L (average value of 1096 ± 575 ng/L), i.e., 4 to 38 times higher than the regulatory threshold of 100 ng/L. This study underlines the need to monitor not only the 20 substances listed in the European Directive, transposed into French law, but also other PFAS, and, above all, to include trifluoroacetic acid.
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.