ArticleScientific reports2017
Simulating the hydrologic cycle in coal mining subsidence areas with a distributed hydrologic model.
Article in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Chemical heterogeneity and mixed pollution are associated with microbial functional potential across soils in a coal mining subsidence landscape.RSC advances · 2026Article
- Article
- Quantifying the inundation impacts of earthquake-induced surface elevation change by hydrological and hydraulic modeling.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- A practical adaptive moving-mesh algorithm for solving unconfined seepage problem with Galerkin finite element method.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- An arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus ameliorates plant growth and hormones after moderate root damage due to simulated coal mining subsidence: a microcosm study.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2019Article
- Water inrush characteristics and hazard effects during the transition from open-pit to underground mining: a case study.Royal Society open science · 2019Article
- Potential harmful elements in coal dust and human health risk assessment near the mining areas in Cherat, Pakistan.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Large-scale ground subsidence caused by coal mining and subsequent water-filling leads to serious environmental problems and economic losses, especially in plains with a high phreatic water level. Clarifying the hydrologic cycle in subsidence areas has important practical value for environmental remediation, and provides a scientific basis for water resource development and utilisation of the subsidence areas. Here we present a simulation approach to describe interactions between subsidence area water (SW) and several hydrologic factors from the River-Subsidence-Groundwater Model (RSGM), which is developed based on the distributed hydrologic model. Analysis of water balance shows that the recharge of SW from groundwater only accounts for a small fraction of the total water source, due to weak groundwater flow in the plain. The interaction between SW and groundwater has an obvious annual cycle. The SW basically performs as a net source of groundwater in the wet season, and a net sink for groundwater in the dry season. The results show there is an average 905.34 million m
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.