MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3118674442 · doi:10.1111/risa.13676

Drinking Water Consumption Patterns among Private Well Users in Ontario: Implications for Exposure Assessment of Waterborne Infection

2021· article· en· W3118674442 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sarah Lavallee, Tessa Latchmore, Paul Hynds, R. Stephen Brown, Corinne J. Schuster‐Wallace, Sarah Dickson‐Anderson, Anna Majury

Bibliographic record

VenueRisk Analysis · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFecal contamination and water quality
Canadian institutionsKingston Health Sciences CentrePublic Health OntarioMcMaster UniversityUniversity of SaskatchewanQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBottled waterConsumption (sociology)Environmental healthTap waterWater supplyWater consumptionPopulationWater useMedicineDemographyEnvironmental scienceWater resource managementEnvironmental engineeringEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding the water consumption patterns within a specific population informs development of increasingly accurate, spatially specific exposure and/or risk assessment of waterborne infection. The current study examined the consumption patterns of private well users in Ontario while considering potentially influential underlying sociodemographics, household characteristics, and experiential factors. A province-wide online survey was circulated between May and August 2018 (n = 1,162). Overall, 81.5% of respondents reported daily well water consumption (i.e., tap water). Results indicate a mean daily well water consumption rate of 1,132 mL/day (SD = 649 mL/day) among well water consumers. Gender was significantly associated with well water consumption, with higher consumption rates found among female respondents. The experience of acute gastrointestinal illness (AGI) symptoms or diagnosis in the past 12 months did not impact the volume of water consumed, suggesting that experiencing previous AGI does not decrease consumption volumes, and therefore exposure over time. Significantly higher rates of well water consumption were found among respondents who reported previous testing or ongoing water treatment. Approximately 45.5% of survey respondents who stated that they do not consume well water selected bottled water as their primary household drinking water supply. Bottled water consumption was also not associated with previous AGI experiences. Findings will inform future quantitative microbial risk assessments associated with private well water use by providing spatially and demographically specific estimates of well water consumption.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.595
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRisk AnalysisSame topicFecal contamination and water qualityFrench-language works237,207