MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390732070 · doi:10.14796/jwmm.c511

E. coli Levels Associated with Source Waters and Household Handling Practices of Potable Water in Peri-urban Phnom Penh, Cambodia

2024· article· en· W4390732070 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kim Irvine, Tom Murphy, Lihoun Teang, L.M. Lok, Chea Eliyan, S. Sovann

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Water Management Modeling · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Stormwater Management Solutions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBottled waterRainwater harvestingWater qualityEnvironmental sciencePotable waterWater sourceWater resource managementEnvironmental engineeringWetlandWater supplyEnvironmental healthEnvironmental protectionEcologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cambodia has made progress towards addressing Sustainable Development Goal 6.1. “By 2030, achieve universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water for all”, but challenges remain in fully realizing this target. We begin this paper by reviewing current country-wide access to safe and affordable water and subsequently report on the results of water sampling done for E. coli in a peri-urban area north of Phnom Penh that was conducted between 2018 and 2020. The sampling examined E. coli levels in source waters, including rivers, ponds, a large lake/wetland, wells, rainwater harvesting systems, piped water, and bottled water. Sampling from household storage containers and in-home drinking cups also was done to assess the effects that handling practices might have on exposure to E. coli. We show that country-wide, as well as in the peri-urban study area, there has been increased access to piped water. Piped water and commercially-available bottled water (0.5–1.5 L PET bottles) had the lowest E. coli levels in our study area, although such bottled water is not an affordable alternative for many peri-urban families. Surface pond water and the Tonle Sap River contained the highest E. coli levels and would pose the greatest risk associated with direct consumption. Handling practices may impact drinking water quality, as a significant difference (p=0.2) was found in E. coli levels between samples taken from commercially-available 0.5–1.5 L PET bottles and from household cups into which the bottled water was poured. There also was a significant difference (p<0.05) in E. coli levels between piped water sampled directly from the tap and piped water stored in bulk household containers. The geometric mean concentration of E. coli in large, covered, traditional outdoor storage jars used for rainwater harvesting was nearly 10 times lower than the same type of jars that were not covered, although due to the small sample size and variability in the data, the difference was not significant (p=0.5). Despite the increasing availability of piped water service in the study area, we found a diversity of water source practices, including use of rainwater harvesting, surface water, 20 L bottled water, and wells. These source waters can be safe, but must be routinely monitored. The study illustrates the advantages of field-based testing for effective screening of E. coli in peri-urban areas.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.617

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.193 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Water Management ModelingSame topicUrban Stormwater Management SolutionsFrench-language works237,207