ArticleScientific reports2025
Multi-criteria decision analysis of gas enrichment risk and land degradation in goaf areas.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Gas enrichment in goaf areas significantly threatens mine safety and surface environmental stability, particularly under top-cutting and pressure-relief mining methods. This study proposes a comprehensive multi-criteria decision-making framework that configures the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and the Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) to evaluate a coupled gas enrichment-land degradation risk in goaf areas under top-cutting and pressure-relief mining. Five main criteria, geological conditions, mining parameters, ventilation characteristics, gas emission rates, and ecological vulnerability, were assessed through expert judgment and field data. AHP was used to derive criterion weights, with fault density (11.5%) and coal seam gas content (10.2%) identified as key sub-factors. TOPSIS analysis ranked six goaf zones, identifying G5 as the lowest-risk (C
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.