ArticleEnvironmental monitoring and assessment2020
A multi-criteria evaluation system for arable land resource assessment.
Article in Environmental monitoring and assessment, 2020. 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.
- Soil Quality Assessment in Farmland of a Rapidly Industrializing Area in the Yangtze Delta, China.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Comprehensive evaluation of soil quality in a desert steppe influenced by industrial activities in northern China.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- An integrated regional water quality assessment method considering interrelationships among monitoring indicators.Environmental monitoring and assessment · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study proposed a multi-criteria evaluation system for arable land resources by combining the soil integrated fertility index (IFI) with a soil cleanliness index (based on heavy metals and metalloid content). A total of 16 typical arable land units in Chongming District, China, were evaluated using the proposed evaluation system based on 104 collected soil samples in 16 towns. The comprehensive soil evaluation scores of arable lands in 16 towns were in the range of 90.7 to 99.2 with a mean of 96.2, indicating that the arable land in all 16 towns was at the level of excellent (≥ 90.0). Lower cleanliness indices had a significant impact on the final evaluation score. In comparison with single-index evaluation systems (i.e., the IFI or soil cleanliness index), the proposed multi-criteria system better reflects the quality of the soil. In the practice of arable land requisition and subsidy policy, the proposed multi-criteria evaluation system not only encourages farmers to preserve arable lands during farming but also helps agricultural authorities make effective and reliable management decisions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.