Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40440281›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Application and evaluation of traditional garden culture in modern urban landscape design under the context of cultural sustainability.

XiaoXi Zhao, Rohayah Binti Che Amat

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

XiaoXi ZhaoMalaysia-Japan International Institute of Technology, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.ORCID 0009-0001-2096-5227
Rohayah Binti Che AmatMalaysia-Japan International Institute of Technology, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) views cultural diversity as a core driver of sustainable development. Traditional garden culture, as an essential component of Chinese culture, encompasses rich historical significance and unique aesthetic values. Integrating elements of traditional garden culture into modern urban landscape design can enhance the cultural depth of urban spaces and increase the attractiveness and cultural identity of urban environments, thereby fostering sustainable urban development. In this context, this study proposes a method framework for the innovative design and evaluation of urban landscapes. Urban public landscape streetlights are used as a case study. First, the Grounded Theory (GT) and the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) are combined to construct its hierarchical model of design evaluation indicators, and the weights and priority rankings of these indicators are calculated. Based on the AHP analysis results, the study draws inspiration from the traditional garden cultural elements of the Jinci Temple in Shanxi to carry out an innovative design practice for local urban landscape streetlights. Finally, the Fuzzy Comprehensive Evaluation (FCE) method is employed to assess and select the design proposals. This study explores the application and evaluation methods of traditional garden culture in modern urban landscape design based on the GT-AHP-FCE framework. The feasibility and effectiveness of this framework are validated through design examples, providing innovative theoretical and practical guidance for future designers and offering new pathways for the inheritance and innovation of traditional garden culture.

Indexed as

City PlanningGardeningGardensSustainable DevelopmentChinaCitiesHumans

Identifiers

PMID40440281
PMCPMC12185156

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.