Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39028698›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Incongruence between residential uses and perceptions of fertilizers and deicers.

Heather D Craska, Amélie Y Davis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Heather D CraskaDepartment of Natural Resources and Environmental Sciences, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois, United States of America.ORCID 0009-0001-3415-8880
Amélie Y DavisDepartment of Economics and Geosciences, United States Air Force Academy, Colorado Springs, Colorado, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-7373-7618

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Fertilizers and deicers are common materials for property maintenance in the Midwest, however, their application contributes to negative environmental impacts when applied incorrectly. While fertilizer use is well researched, deicer use on private properties is not. This research aims to ascertain whether patterns of fertilizer use are different from those of deicer use in Hamilton County, Ohio, and determine what factors influence a resident's decision to use these materials. Survey data were collected from 110 single-family households (38.9% response rate). Respondents are motivated by property appearance to apply fertilizers. Deicer use stems from safety concerns. Respondents were significantly more likely to consider the environmental impact of fertilizers than deicers. Respondents felt that using deicers is a more neighborly practice while using fertilizers reflects more positively on them in their neighborhood. This information can be used to develop outreach programs to reduce the environmental impacts of fertilizers and deicers.

Indexed as

FertilizersAdultEnvironmentFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOhioPerceptionSurveys and QuestionnairesFertilizers

Identifiers

PMID39028698
PMCPMC11259275

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
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.