Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42576912›Full record

ReviewSustainable microbiology2025

Designating river environments as bathing waters: challenges and opportunities at the science-policy interface.

David M Oliver

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Sustainable microbiology, 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

1 author.

David M OliverBiological and Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Natural Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling FK9 4LA, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Regulatory standards for primary contact recreation are used around the world to limit risks to human health from exposure to poor water quality. Prior to 2020, no stretches of river in the UK were designated as bathing water environments. However, growing recreational use of rivers combined with grassroots action by campaign groups to promote a river clean-up agenda has helped to establish, and increase the number of, designated riverine bathing waters in the UK. Nevertheless, since 2020 most newly designated riverine bathing waters have struggled to meet the microbiological standards associated with the Bathing Water Directive due to anthropogenic inputs originating from farming, sewage, and wastewater discharges. This is, in part, due to UK rivers being managed historically for different ecosystem services, with no statutory monitoring for public health. Calls are growing for river water quality improvements, fuelled by frequent media coverage concerning sewage overflows into freshwater environments and widespread recognition of poor delivery on targets for UK waterbody quality. In response, a five-point plan to improve understanding and future management of faecal indicators at riverine bathing water sites is proposed, offering transferability to other regions of the world where microbiological monitoring of river environments is needed to support recreation.

Indexed as

bathing water regulationscombined sewer overflowsEscherichia colifaecal pollutionpublic healthriver monitoring

Identifiers

PMID42576912
PMCPMC13375313

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.