ArticleScientific reports2024
Time-varying trends from Arctic ozonesonde time series in the years 1994-2022.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- A novel approach to predict the arctic stratospheric ozone from stratospheric polar vortex dynamics using explainable machine learning.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Tracing the signatures of ozone recovery in the Arctic ozone.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although evidence of recovery in Antarctic stratospheric ozone has been found, evidence of recovery in Arctic ozone is still elusive, even though 25 years have passed since the peak in ozone depleting substances. Here we have used a Dynamic Linear Model to derive time-varying trends over 20-year periods in the Arctic ozone time series, measured in-situ by ozonesondes from 6 stations, from 1994 to 2022. The model accounts for seasonality, external forcing and 1st-order correlation in the residuals. As proxies for the external forcing, we have used tropopause pressure (replaced with Arctic Oscillation in the troposphere), eddy heat flux, the volume of polar stratospheric clouds multiplied by effective equivalent stratospheric chlorine, and solar radio flux at 10.7 cm for the 11-year solar cycle. Our results indicate that the ozone recovery in the lower Arctic stratosphere is not detectable. Though significant positive trends have been detected prior to 2017 at some stations, there are no statistically significant positive trends after 2017. Moreover, at a number of stations the trends after 2019 are rather negative and significant, varying between - 0.30 ± 0.25 and - 1.00 ± 0.85% per decade. Furthermore, the Arctic troposphere exhibited only statistically significant negative trends over 20-year periods ending in 2017 or later, varying between - 0.31 ± 0.27 and - 1.76 ± 0.41% per decade. These results highlight the importance of continued monitoring of the Arctic ozone.
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.