ArticleJournal of environmental management2024
Lessons learned and recommendations in conducting solutions-driven environmental and public health research.
Article in Journal of environmental management, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Experiences from national biodiversity data infrastructures in Europe: advancing data integration and community engagement.Bioscience · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Solutions-driven research is a transdisciplinary approach that incorporates diverse forms of expertise to identify solutions to stakeholder-identified environmental problems. This qualitative evaluation of early solutions-driven research projects provides transferable recommendations to improve researcher and stakeholder experiences and outcomes in transdisciplinary environmental research projects. Researchers with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Research and Development recently piloted a solutions-driven research approach in two parallel projects; one addressing nutrient management related to coastal waters and another studying wildland fire smoke impacts on indoor air quality. Studying the experiences of those involved with these pilots can enhance the integration of researcher and experiential expertise, improving solutions-driven research outcomes. Data collection included semi-structured interviews with 17 EPA researchers and 12 other stakeholders and reflective case narratives from the authors. We used conventional content analysis to qualitatively analyze perspectives on implementing innovative engagement and research approaches in a solutions-driven process. Findings that reflect common perspectives include the importance of continuous engagement, the challenges of differing timelines and priorities for researchers and stakeholders, and the need to define consistent markers of success across researchers and stakeholders. Key lessons to improve transdisciplinary research identified from the analysis are (1) improving clarity of roles and responsibilities; (2) planning to provide sufficient, continuous project funding over multiple years; (3) expecting research needs and plans to adapt to evolving circumstances; and (4) clearly defining the end of the project.
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.