ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2018
Screening of groundwater remedial alternatives for brownfield sites: a comprehensive method integrated MCDA with numerical simulation.
Article in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Environmental risk mapping of potential abandoned uranium mine contamination on the Navajo Nation, USA, using a GIS-based multi-criteria decision analysis approach.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2020Article
- Arsenic release from pyrite ash waste over an active hydrogeological system and its effects on water quality.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2020Article
- A Novel Preference Elicitation Technique Based on a Graph Model and Its Application to a Brownfield Redevelopment Conflict in China.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Brownfield sites pollution and remediation is an urgent environmental issue worldwide. The screening and assessment of remedial alternatives is especially complex owing to its multiple criteria that involves technique, economy, and policy. To help the decision-makers selecting the remedial alternatives efficiently, the criteria framework conducted by the U.S. EPA is improved and a comprehensive method that integrates multiple criteria decision analysis (MCDA) with numerical simulation is conducted in this paper. The criteria framework is modified and classified into three categories: qualitative, semi-quantitative, and quantitative criteria, MCDA method, AHP-PROMETHEE (analytical hierarchy process-preference ranking organization method for enrichment evaluation) is used to determine the priority ranking of the remedial alternatives and the solute transport simulation is conducted to assess the remedial efficiency. A case study was present to demonstrate the screening method in a brownfield site in Cangzhou, northern China. The results show that the systematic method provides a reliable way to quantify the priority of the remedial alternatives.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29582330What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.