ArticleGeoderma2020
Challenges and lessons for measuring soil metrics in household surveys.
Article in Geoderma, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- How accurate are yield estimates from crop cuts? Evidence from smallholder maize farms in Ethiopia.Food policy · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
While the importance of soils in agriculture cannot be overlooked, plot level soil data remain scarce in the current data landscape. Large-scale household surveys efforts are increasing in low-income countries and assessing the accuracy, scalability and cost-effectiveness of available methods is crucial. Here, we firstly explore soil data requirements for a set of objectives that include identifying a soil constraint, improving recommendation domain studies and capturing soil metrics as covariates, or as outcomes. We then expose the lessons learned from a methodological experiment in rural Ethiopia, where different approaches - farmer's self-elicitation and miniaturized spectrometers - are compared against laboratory benchmarks for a set of soil parameters: soil texture, soil pH and soil organic C. With the exception of soil particle sizes, we find that soil parameters captured through farmer's elicitation do not converge with objective metrics. Miniaturized spectrometers can provide reasonably accurate data for the identification of soil constraints - soil acidity, low organic C or sandy soils. Approximate quantitative predictions can also be delivered for soil pH (R
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.