ArticleEnvironmental management2025
Trends and Gaps in Prescribed Burning Research.
Article in Environmental management, 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Prescribed burning is a key tool in land management globally used to reduce wildfire risks and achieve ecological, cultural and resource management objectives across both natural and human systems. Despite its widespread application, research on prescribed burning is marked by significant gaps. Subsequently, we posed the following research questions: (1) What are the key research topics that define international, peer-reviewed literature on prescribed burning? (2) What are the temporal and spatial trends of these topics? (3) What are the relationships between the national income of a given country and the trends in research topics? And, (4) What are the most salient knowledge gaps in peer-reviewed prescribed burning research, and how can they be addressed? We used structural topic modelling and geoparsing to conduct a detailed text analysis of 7878 peer-reviewed articles on prescribed burning. We revealed that research on prescribed burning is dominated by studies from high-income countries, particularly the United States. This highlights a geographical bias that may skew global understanding and application of prescribed burning practices. Our topic modelling revealed the most prevalent topics to be Fire Regimes and Landscape Biodiversity Management, whilst topics such as Air Pollution & Health, and Wildfire Risk Management gained prominence in recent years. Our analysis highlighted a disconnect between forestry-related research and broader landscape management topics. This finding emphasises the need for more interdisciplinary research, and research on the use and effects of prescribed burning in diverse ecosystems and underrepresented regions, particularly in the context of climate change.
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.