ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2020
Determining optimum sampling numbers for survey of soil heavy metals in decision-making units: taking cadmium as an example.
Article in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A three-dimensional sampling design based on the coefficient of variation method for soil environmental damage investigation.Environmental monitoring and assessment · 2024Article
- A simple method to determine the sampling numbers in decision-making units with unknown variations of soil cadmium.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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Optimum sampling number (OSN) is one critical issue to achieve credible results when surveying heavy metals in soil and undertaking risk assessment for sustainable land use or remediation decisions. Although traditional methods, such as classical statistics, geostatistics, and simulated annealing algorithm, have been used to determine OSN for surveying soil heavy metals, their usefulness is limited because the distribution of soil heavy metal concentration approximately follows a log-normal distribution. Furthermore, existing correction equations for the log-normal distribution may overestimate or underestimate the OSN, and they have not been applied to estimate the OSN of soil heavy metals. The objective of the present study was to find a simple model under the log-normal distribution that determined the OSN for surveying of soil heavy metals in decision-making units. To test the effectiveness and accuracy of this model, soil heavy metals in 17 contaminated areas generating 200 multiscale units were analyzed. Determining equations for OSN, including classical statistics and approximate correction equations, were compared. Results showed that the equation for determining OSN by ordinary least squares (OSN_OLS) was computationally simple and straightforward because of an adjustment of the classic log-normal equation without relying on consulting the adjusted Student t-tables for a noncentralized data distribution. Compared with other OSN determining equations, sampling numbers by OSN_OLS were closer to optimum numbers and effectively avoided the risk of overestimation or underestimation. Descriptive statistics indicated that the estimated pollution results by OSN_OLS in representative units were very similar to original sampling with more sampling information. Furthermore, compared with other OSN-determining equations, the mapping based on OSN_OLS not only described the trends of spatial variation but also improved mapping accuracy. We conclude that OSN_OLS is an effective, straightforward, and exact model to estimate the OSN for surveying of soil heavy metals in decision-making units.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32304065What 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.