Evidence Hub

Occurrence, sampling, identification and characterization of microplastics in tap water: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Malekzadeh M, Dehghanzadeh R, Ebrahimi SM, Sarbakhsh P, Fathifar Z, Aslani H

Ecotoxicology and environmental safety, 2025

1 citation

Abstract

Identifying microplastics (MPs) in tap water has recently attracted considerable attention. The present study aimed to systematically review MPs contamination and characteristics in tap water. All techniques used for sampling, processing, and analyzing MPs in tap water were also assessed. Furthermore, the characteristics of MPs, including abundance, type, color, and shape, were summarized. Various databases, including Web of Science, PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus, Springer, and MDPI, were searched to find published articles up to January 2025. The occurrence of MPs in tap water was meta-analyzed using a random-effects model. A total of 6100 articles were found, of which 43 were included in the systematic review. The results indicated that the pooled mean concentration of MPs in tap water was 56.98 particles per liter (P/L). Manual sampling with a sample volume of less than 1 liter was most commonly used, and microscopic, Raman, and Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) methods were frequently applied for extracting and identifying MPs. The most abundant polymer identified was polyethylene (PE), followed by polyethylene terephthalate (PET) and polypropylene (PP). Fibers and fragments were the dominant forms of MPs found in water. The lack of a harmonized protocol and the difficulty in validating MP analysis methods in tap water have led to inconsistent and sometimes contradictory results, making comparisons unreliable. The findings of this systematic review can…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free