MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3208670288 · doi:10.5864/d2021-015

Wastewater-based epidemiology: current uses and future opportunities as a public health surveillance tool

2021· article· en· W3208670288 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Juliette O’Keeffe

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Health Review · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 detection and testing
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic healthEnvironmental healthPandemicEpidemiologyPublic health surveillanceBusinessCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Data scienceEnvironmental planningRisk analysis (engineering)MedicineComputer scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wastewater-based epidemiology (WBE) seeks to use biological or chemical indicators in sewage to provide information on the overall health of a community. This paper provides an overview of the range of applications of WBE over the past two decades, how it has been used to inform public health responses, and considerations for more integrated approaches to WBE based on a review of the literature. The review finds that WBE has been used extensively around the world for the estimation of consumption patterns of illicit drugs and other substances, but a range of novel applications also exist. As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, many communities used WBE for the first time as a complementary public health surveillance tool, monitoring trends in SARS-CoV-2 prevalence in large cities, and for micro-surveillance on a more targeted level. WBE may continue to be a useful public health surveillance tool in the future; however, several limitations and challenges exist. Consideration of how information obtained through WBE can be used to inform public health responses is essential to understanding the potential costs and benefits compared with conventional public health surveillance techniques.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.231
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.167 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations90
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Health ReviewSame topicSARS-CoV-2 detection and testingFrench-language works237,207