Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 261

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Screening Analysis of Human Pharmaceutical Compounds in U.S. Surface Waters

Anderson, Paul D., D'Aco, Vincent J., Shanahan, Peter, Chapra, Steven C., Buzby, Mary E., Cunningham, Virginia L., DuPlessie, Beth M., Hayes, Eileen P., Mastrocco, Frank J., Parke, Neil J., Rader, John C., Samuelian, John H., Schwab, Bradley W.·2004·Environmental Science & Technology

Abstract

The PhATE (Pharmaceutical Assessment and Transport Evaluation) model presented in this paper was developed as a tool to estimate concentrations of active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) in U.S. surface waters that result from patient use (or consumption) of medicines. PhATE uses a mass balance approach to model predicted environmental concentrations (PECs) in 11 watersheds selected to be representative of most hydrologic regions of the United States. The model divides rivers into discrete segments. It estimates the mass of API that enters a segment from upstream or from publicly owned treatment works (POTW) and is subsequently lost from the segment via in-stream loss mechanisms or flow diversions (i.e., man-made withdrawals). POTW discharge loads are estimated based on the population served, the API use per capita, the potential loss of the compound associated with human use (e.g., metabolism), and the portion of the API mass removed in the POTW. Simulations using three surrogate compounds showthat PECs generated by PhATE are generally within an order of magnitude of measured concentrations and that the cumulative probability distribution of PECs for all watersheds included in PhATE is consistent with the nationwide distribution of measured concentrations of the surrogate compounds. Model simulations for 11 APIs yielded four categories of results. (1) PECs fit measured data for two compounds. (2) PECs are below analytical method detection limits and thus are consistent with measured data for three compounds. (3) PECs are higher than (i.e., not consistent with) measured data for three compounds. However, this may be the consequence of as yet unidentified depletion mechanisms. (4) PECs are several orders of magnitude below some measured data but consistentwith most measured data forthree compounds. For the fourth category, closer examination of sampling locations suggests that the field-measured concentrations for these compounds do not accurately reflect human use. Overall, these results demonstrate that PhATE may be used to predict screening-level concentrations of APIs and related compounds in the environment as well as to evaluate the suitability of existing fate information for an API.

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 · 10.1021/es034430b

Cites

14 of 14 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

Cited by

See all 261

Metadata

Authors
Anderson, P. D., D'Aco, V. J., Shanahan, P., Chapra, S. C., Buzby, M. E., Cunningham, V. L., DuPlessie, B. M., Hayes, E. P., Mastrocco, F. J., Parke, N. J., Rader, J. C., Samuelian, J. H., & Schwab, B. W.
Venue
Environmental Science & Technology
Published
2003-12-18
Volume
38
Issue
3
Pages
838-849
ISSN
  • 0013-936X (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-5851
OpenAlex
W2052099337
Cited by
261
References
14
FWCI
11.54
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

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.