Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42776682›Full record

ReviewMethods and protocols2026

An Integrated Methodological Framework for SoilHealth Assessment in Volcanic Island Agroecosystems: Indicator Selection, Analytical Workflows and Context-Sensitive Interpretation.

Sara S González-González, Mónica González-González

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Methods and protocols, 2026. 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

2 authors.

Sara S González-GonzálezInstituto Canario de Investigaciones Agrarias (ICIA), 38270 San Cristóbal de La Laguna, Tenerife, Spain.
Mónica González-GonzálezInstituto Canario de Investigaciones Agrarias (ICIA), 38270 San Cristóbal de La Laguna, Tenerife, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-3550-4308

Funding

Canary Islands Government CAIA2024-005-04-S4 and CAIA2024-015-00
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Soil health assessment is increasingly used to support sustainable land management and agronomic decision-making, but generic indicator lists and universal scoring systems may be inadequate for highly reactive volcanic soils. This critical methodological review proposes an integrated methodological framework for volcanic island agroecosystems that explicitly separates analytical measurement from interpretation. The framework links assessment objectives and site context to fit-for-purpose analytical levels and classifies evidence as method-matched thresholds, local or reference benchmarks, relative or temporal comparisons, mechanistic evidence and plant-soil response validation. The reviewed evidence shows that standardized measurements do not necessarily support transferable diagnostic criteria and that volcanic-soil and andic properties can affect both analytical behavior and the functional meaning of indicator values. Rather than assigning universal scores, indicators are integrated by soil function and interpreted in relation to soil mineralogy, crop requirements, management history, and disturbance or recovery trajectories. This approach helps distinguish intrinsic volcanic-soil properties from management-induced degradation, identify functionally relevant constraints and make diagnostic confidence explicit. The framework provides a practical basis for routine monitoring, targeted diagnosis, and the development of locally validated soil health reference systems in volcanic island agriculture.

Indexed as

analytical workflowsAndosolscontext-sensitive interpretationisland agroecosystemsmethod suitabilitysoil healthsoil indicatorsvolcanic ashvolcanic soils

Identifiers

PMID42776682
PMCPMC13600072

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.