MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1915749101 · doi:10.5864/d2014-006

Investigating elevated copper and lead levels in school drinking water

2013· article· en· W1915749101 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Prabjit Barn, Anne‐Marie Nicol, Sylvia Struck, Sabrina Dosanjh, Raymond Li, Tom Kosatsky

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Health Review · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHeavy Metal Exposure and Toxicity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaBC Centre for Disease Control
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCopperLead (geology)Environmental healthLead poisoningEnvironmental scienceLead exposureWater sourceMedicineChemistryWater resource managementBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Copper and lead continue to be detected at levels above drinking water guidelines in Canadian schools. Although water is typically not an important source of these metals, intermittent use and corrosive water can cause copper and lead to leach from plumbing. Exposure to elevated copper levels is linked to acute gastrointestinal effects in the short term and possible liver effects in the long term, whereas even low level lead exposures are associated with neurodevelopmental effects. Because school water is not regularly monitored for corrosion metals, elevated concentrations are often brought to the attention of public health officials through unexpected circumstances. Here, the death of salmon eggs in a classroom aquarium triggered an investigation that found elevated levels of copper and lead in the school's drinking water. The investigation was then expanded to the school district. Copper and lead levels varied considerably across schools as well as in outlets located in the same school. The effectiveness of flushing, which was implemented as a mitigation strategy, was also found to differ by school building and outlet. Actions described in this case report may be informative for health authorities across Canada.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.359
Threshold uncertainty score0.715

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.250 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations34
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Health ReviewSame topicHeavy Metal Exposure and ToxicityFrench-language works237,207