↓ Skip to main content

Monitoring urban beaches with qPCR vs. culture measures of fecal indicator bacteria: Implications for public notification

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Health, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
10 news outlets
twitter
5 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Monitoring urban beaches with qPCR vs. culture measures of fecal indicator bacteria: Implications for public notification
Published in
Environmental Health, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12940-017-0256-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Samuel Dorevitch, Abhilasha Shrestha, Stephanie DeFlorio-Barker, Cathy Breitenbach, Ira Heimler

Abstract

The United States Environmental Protection Agency has established methods for testing beach water using the rapid quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) method, as well as "beach action values" so that the results of such testing can be used to make same-day beach management decisions. Despite its numerous advantages over culture-based monitoring approaches, qPCR monitoring has yet to become widely used in the US or elsewhere. Considering qPCR results obtained on a given day as the best available measure of that day's water quality, we evaluated the frequency of correct vs. incorrect beach management decisions that are driven by culture testing. Beaches in Chicago, USA, were monitored using E. coli culture and enterococci qPCR methods over 894 beach-days in the summers of 2015 and 2016. Agreement in beach management using the two methods, after taking into account agreement due to chance, was summarized using Cohen's kappa statistic. No meaningful agreement (beyond that expected by chance) was observed between beach management actions driven by the two pieces of information available to beach managers on a given day: enterococci qPCR results ofsamples collected that morning and E. coli culture results of samples collected the previous day. The E. coli culture beach action value was exceeded 3.4 times more frequently than the enterococci qPCR beach action value (22.6 vs. 6.6% of beach-days). The largest evaluation of qPCR-based beach monitoring to date provides little scientific rationale for continued E. coli culture testing of beach water in our setting. The observation that the E. coli culture beach action value was exceeded three times as frequently as the enterococci qPCR beach action value suggests that, although the beach action values for bacteria using different measurement methods are thought to provide comparable information about health risk, this does not appear to be the case in all settings.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 51 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 25%
Researcher 12 24%
Other 6 12%
Student > Master 5 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Other 8 16%
Unknown 4 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 10 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 12%
Social Sciences 5 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 8%
Engineering 3 6%
Other 7 14%
Unknown 16 31%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 70. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 May 2018.
All research outputs
#444,173
of 20,568,640 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Health
#120
of 1,415 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,129
of 281,561 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Health
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 20,568,640 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,415 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 281,561 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them