Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31377906›Full record

ArticleEcoHealth2019

Costs and Benefits of Delaying Remediation on Ecological Resources at Contaminated Sites.

Joanna Burger

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in EcoHealth, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Ecological information and approaches needed for risk communication dialogs for acute or chronic environmental crises.Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2022
    Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Joanna BurgerDivision of Life Sciences, Rutgers University, 604 Allison Road, Piscataway, NJ, 08854-8082, USA. burger@biology.rutgers.edu.

Funding

United States Department of Energy DE-FC01-06EW0753
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The USA and other nations have massive industrial, radiologic, and chemical legacy wastes on numerous sites, for example from the Cold War and industrial activities. Most of these sites will require remediation (cleanup of contaminants). Prioritization is essential to determine the order of cleanup, leaving some tasks for a later time. This paper examines the potential costs and benefits of delaying remediation on ecological resources on contaminated sites. Aspects to consider include those related to management and planning, source term and pathways, risks and resources, and external drivers (regulations and laws, stakeholders). The US Department of Energy was used as a case study to examine the effects of delaying remediation. The conceptual model and tables provided here can serve as guidance or checklists for site managers.

Indexed as

Models, TheoreticalConservation of Natural ResourcesCost-Benefit AnalysisEcosystemEnvironmental Restoration and RemediationModels, EconomicRisk FactorsTime FactorsUnited StatesDelaying remediationDepartment of energyEcological resourcesMetrics

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.