MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410230478 · doi:10.2166/wh.2025.020

Particulate contaminants and treatment decision-making: maximizing the value of raw water pathogen monitoring for drinking water safety

2025· article· en· W4410230478 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Dafne de Brito Cruz, Philip J. Schmidt, Kelsey L. Kundert, Norma J. Ruecker, Monica B. Emelko

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Water and Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicParasitic Infections and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsCryptosporidiumEnvironmental scienceRaw waterWater qualityParticulatesWater treatmentContaminationWork (physics)Environmental monitoringRisk assessmentEnvironmental engineeringRisk analysis (engineering)Environmental resource managementEnvironmental planningBusinessComputer scienceEngineeringEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Periodic evaluation of particulate contaminants in raw/untreated water is integral to assessing risk, establishing treatment requirements, and ensuring drinking water safety. However, pathogenic microorganisms and other discrete particles (e.g., microplastics) are not typically monitored with any regularity. When monitoring is required, recommended, or proactively used to evaluate the adequacy of treatment or assess treatment needs, there is a need for guidance on how to collect data and use them to maximize return on investment. The potentially increasing variability in source water quality associated with climate change emphasizes the importance of knowing contaminant concentrations to effectively manage risks. This work presents a framework to guide the development of monitoring protocols for particulate contaminants in water and the integration of monitoring data and quantitative microbial risk assessment into treatment decisions. The protozoa monitoring and risk-based compliance approach of a drinking water utility in Canada is presented along with 7 years of data. Guidance for determining sampling frequencies and locations is provided. It is shown that Cryptosporidium monitoring may be insufficient to inform treatment needs when Giardia cysts are more abundant in source water. This work underscores the importance of revisiting and enhancing monitoring practices for effective treatment and public health protection.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.433
Threshold uncertainty score0.314

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Water and HealthSame topicParasitic Infections and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207