ArticleScientific reports2026
A multi-temporal framework for assessing flood risk to cultural heritage: spatiotemporal evidence from Shandong Province (2000-2020).
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Cultural heritage sites are increasingly exposed to flood hazards, yet existing assessments often overlook heritage-specific vulnerability and rely on static spatial units. To address these limitations, this study develops a Comprehensive Heritage Flood Risk Index (CHFRI) framework that integrates hazard, exposure, vulnerability, and response capacity dimensions, with explicitly incorporation of heritage attributes into the assessment. A combined AHP-entropy weighting approach was employed to balance expert judgement with objective data, and a sensitivity analysis was conducted to confirm the robustness of spatial risk identification across different weight combinations. This framework was then applied to 2,194 heritage sites in Shandong Province over the period 2000 to 2020. Results indicated that: (1) the spatial pattern remained consistent: high-risk sites concentrated in eastern coastal (Rizhao, Weihai) and western inland cities (Dezhou, Liaocheng), while a low-risk belt extended across the central region; (2) the overall risk structure improved significantly: high-risk sites decreased from 39.88% to 27.62%, while Intermediate-risk sites increased from 37.32% to 48.63%. Among the 30 Highest-risk sites in 2000, 26 were downgraded, yet 18 new sites escalated to the Highest-risk category by 2020, including 4 national-level and 14 provincial-level sites; (3) heritage typologies showed divergent trajectories: ancient buildings and modern buildings exhibited substantial risk reduction, whereas grotto temples and stone carvings remained persistently vulnerable. The CHFRI framework provides a transferable model for climate-resilient heritage conservation and recommends future integration of AI-enhanced predictive tools.
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.