Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40301131›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental monitoring and assessment2025

An approach for assessing risk, planning, and decision-making in protecting ecological resources on contaminated sites compared to local regions.

Joanna Burger, Michael Gochfeld, Kevin G Brown, Kelly Ng, David S Kosson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental monitoring and assessment, 2025. 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

5 authors.

Joanna BurgerDivision of Life Sciences, Rutgers University, 604 Allison Road, Piscataway, NJ, 08854, USA. burger@biology.rutgers.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8877-2966
Michael GochfeldRutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, EOHSI and CRESP, Piscataway, NJ, 08854, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9813-3132
Kevin G BrownCRESP and Civil and Environmental Engineering, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, 37215, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4488-8817
Kelly NgDivision of Life Sciences, Rutgers University, 604 Allison Road, Piscataway, NJ, 08854, USA.
David S KossonCRESP and Civil and Environmental Engineering, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, 37215, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9898-456X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The United States and other countries have degraded lands because of legacy wastes from the Second World War, Cold War, and industrialization. There is a need to return lands to productive uses that necessitates assessing and monitoring ecological resources. Federal governments and the public are interested in assurances that federal landowners are protective of environmental and ecological health. This paper uses the U.S. National Land Cover Database to (1) compare land cover on two Department of Energy (DOE) facilities with the surrounding region (10-km and 30-km bands), (2) determine if each has preserved more of the climax vegetation on each site, and (3) discuss how the method allows managers, regulators, and the public to assess if ecological resources on contaminated lands are protected. The analysis method employed provides a monitoring tool that can be used following restoration or management. About 70% of Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR) is forested, compared to 45% of the 10-km buffer (52% of 30-km buffer). Savannah River Site (SRS) protected 58% of its forest compared to 27% of its buffers. Both DOE sites have the opportunity to preserve the largest tracts of unbroken forest during remediation, especially those that include wetlands surrounded by forest. The highest percentage of land cover on both sites is the local natural forest. Visually, ORR has more development in the surrounding region than does SRS. This method can be applied to degraded sites across the U.S. and elsewhere and provides a visual tool for managers, regulators, and the public to quickly access information on vegetation types, the importance of ecological resources, and vulnerability of these resources within the region.

Indexed as

Conservation of Natural ResourcesDecision MakingEnvironmental MonitoringEnvironmental PollutionRisk AssessmentUnited StatesDepartment of EnergyEcological riskEnvironmental metricsLand useRisk communicationTemperate forest

Identifiers

PMID40301131
PMCPMC12041161

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.