Microplastic contamination of drinking water: A systematic review
PLoS ONE, ISSN: 1932-6203, Vol: 15, Issue: 7 July, Page: e0236838
2020
- 214Citations
- 608Captures
- 13Mentions
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations214
- Citation Indexes207
- 207
- CrossRef190
- Policy Citations7
- Policy Citation7
- Captures608
- Readers608
- 585
- 23
- Mentions13
- News Mentions12
- News12
- Blog Mentions1
- Blog1
Most Recent News
Is Bottled Water Really Just Repackaged Tap Water?
When it comes to water, tap gets a bad rap. Bottled water is viewed as cleaner, healthier, and better tasting. But what if that's all
Review Description
Background: Microplastics (MPs) are omnipresent in the environment, including the human food chain; a likely important contributor to human exposure is drinking water. Objective: To undertake a systematic review of MP contamination of drinking water and estimate quantitative exposures. Methods: The protocol for the systematic review employed has been published in PROSPERO (PROSPERO 2019, Registration number: CRD42019145290). MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science were searched from launch to the 3rd of June 2020, selecting studies that used procedural blank samples and a validated method for particle composition analysis. Studies were reviewed within a narrative analysis. A bespoke risk of bias (RoB) assessment tool was used. Results: 12 studies were included in the review: six of tap water (TW) and six of bottled water (BW). Meta-analysis was not appropriate due to high statistical heterogeneity (I>95%). Seven studies were rated low RoB and all confirmed MP contamination of drinking water. The most common polymers identified in samples were polyethylene terephthalate (PET) and polypropylene (PP), Methodological variability was observed throughout the experimental protocols. For example, the minimum size of particles extracted and analysed, which varied from 1 to 100 μm, was seen to be critical in the data reported. The maximum reported MP contamination was 628 MPs/L for TW and 4889 MPs/L for BW, detected in European samples. Based on typical consumption data, this may be extrapolated to a maximum yearly human adult uptake of 458,000 MPs for TW and 3,569,000 MPs for BW. Conclusions: This is the first systematic review that appraises the quality of existing evidence on MP contamination of drinking water and estimates human exposures. The precautionary principle should be adopted to address concerns on possible human health effects from consumption of MPs. Future research should aim to standardise experimental protocols to aid comparison and elevate quality.
Bibliographic Details
10.1371/journal.pone.0236838; 10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.g002; 10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.t002; 10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.g001; 10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.g003; 10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.g004; 10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.t001; 10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.t004; 10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.t003
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85089129953&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236838; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32735575; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236838; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.g002; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.g002; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.t002; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.t002; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.g001; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.g001; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.g003; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.g003; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.g004; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.g004; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.t001; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.t001; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.t004; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.t004; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.t003; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.t003; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.g002; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.g002; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.g004; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.g004; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.t004; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.t004; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.t002; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.t002; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.t003; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.t003; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236838; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0236838; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.g001; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.g001; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.g003; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.g003; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.t001; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0236838.t001; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0236838&type=printable
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know