Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40144140›Full record

ArticleMethodsX2025

MM

William Pollock, Joseph Wartman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in MethodsX, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. MMMethodsX · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
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.

William PollockShannon & Wilson, Inc., 400N 34th St., Suite 100, Seattle, WA 98103, United States.
Joseph WartmanDepartment of Civil & Environmental Engineering, University of Washington, 201 More Hall, Seattle, WA 98195, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Quantified estimates of landslide consequences in space and time (risk) facilitate rational land use decisions such as zoning for new development, protecting existing communities, allocating finite resources, designing mitigation works, and educating the public about natural hazards. Probabilistic landslide risk analysis (PLRA) should include all landslide modes, magnitudes, and triggering scenarios that could credibly cause harm and is most useful on a regional scale where landslide risk at a location can be compared across a broader area and in the context of other natural and anthropogenic sources of risk. However, to date, no readily transferable, regional-scale method for PLRA exists. In this work, we expand an existing deterministic multimodal method for landslide risk analysis developed in the country of Lebanon into a linked framework of code-based modules that are location-agnostic and computationally efficient for regional end-to-end risk estimation.•Use of near-global, remote-sensing-based inputs enables risk estimates almost anywhere in the world•Modular computational framework facilitates upgrades of component models as new research becomes available•Probabilistic implementation through a Monte Carlo approach.

Indexed as

CoseismicDebris flowHazardLand useMass-wastingMM3: Multimodal framework for regional-scale quantitative landslide risk analysisPrecipitation-inducedProbabilistic analysisRisk assessmentRockfallVulnerability

Identifiers

PMID40144140
PMCPMC11938156

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.