Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 281

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 56 of the 56 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A global meta-analysis of heavy metal(loid)s pollution in soils near copper mines: Evaluation of pollution level and probabilistic health risks

Chen, Li, Zhou, Mingxi, Wang, Jingzhe, Zhang, Zhiqin, Duan, Chengjiao, Wang, Xiangxiang, Zhao, Shuling, Bai, Xiaohan, Li, Zhijie, Li, Zimin, Fang, Linchuan·2022·Science of The Total Environment

Abstract

With the rapid development of the mining industry, the pollution of heavy metal(loid)s in soils near copper (Cu) mining sites is a significant concern worldwide. However, the pollution status and probabilistic health risks of heavy metal(loid)s of soils associated with Cu mines, have rarely been studied on a global scale. In this study, eight heavy metal(loid) concentrations in soil samples taken near 102 Cu mining sites worldwide were obtained through a literature review. Based on this database, the heavy metal(loid) pollution and ecological risk in soils near Cu mines were evaluated. Most of the study sites exceeded the moderately to heavily polluted levels of Cu and Cd; compared to other regions, higher pollution levels were observed at sites in Oman, China, Australia, and the United Kingdom. Soil pollution by Cd, Pb, and Zn at agricultural sites was higher than that in non-agricultural sites. In addition, these heavy metal(loid)s produced a high ecological risk to soils around Cu mining sites in which the contribution of Cd, Cu, and As reached up to 46.5%, 21.7%, and 18.4%, respectively. The mean hazard indices of the eight heavy metal(loid)s were 0.209 and 0.979 for adults and children, respectively. The Monte Carlo simulation further predicted that 1.40% and 29.9% of non-carcinogenic risk values for adults and children, respectively, exceeded the safe level of 1.0. Moreover, 84.5% and 91.0% of the total cancer risk values for adults and children, respectively, exceeded the threshold of 1E-04. Arsenic was the main contributor to non-carcinogenic risk, while Cu had the highest exceedance of carcinogenic risk. Our findings indicate that the control of Cu, Cd, and As should be prioritized because of their high incidence and significant risks in soils near Cu mines. These results provide valuable inputs for policymakers in designing effective strategies for reducing the exposure of heavy metal(loid)s in this area worldwide.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.155441

Cites

56 of 56 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 56 references

Metadata

Authors
Chen, L., Zhou, M., Wang, J., Zhang, Z., Duan, C., Wang, X., Zhao, S., Bai, X., Li, Z., Li, Z., & Fang, L.
Venue
Science of The Total Environment
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-08
Volume
835
Pages
155441
ISSN
0048-9697 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4224278770
Cited by
281
References
56
FWCI
5.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A global meta-analysis of heavy metal(loid)s pollution in soils near copper mines: Evaluation of pollution level and probabilistic health risks. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.155441
The paper
Chen, L., Zhou, M., Wang, J., Zhang, Z., Duan, C., Wang, X., Zhao, S., Bai, X., Li, Z., Li, Z., & Fang, L. (2022). A global meta-analysis of heavy metal(loid)s pollution in soils near copper mines: Evaluation of pollution level and probabilistic health risks. Science of The Total Environment. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.155441

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.