ArticleHeliyon2024
A comprehensive comparison of bias correction methods in climate model simulations: Application on ERA5-Land across different temporal resolutions.
Article in Heliyon, 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.
- Analyzing climate change trends and projection of their effects on wood equilibrium moisture content using CMIP6 models under SSP scenarios in Iran.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- High-resolution spatially interpolated FAO Penman-Monteith crop reference evapotranspiration maps of Sicily Island (Italy) and Jucar River system (Spain) using AgERA5 and ERA5-Land reanalysis datasets.Journal of hydrology. Regional studies · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Climate data plays a crucial role in water resources management, which is becoming an increasingly relevant asset in all types of hydrological analysis not only for climate change studies but for various horizon forecasting. Though the ever-improving accuracy of climate models' spatial and temporal resolution has surged the validity of their outputs, the products of global and regional climate models need to be corrected to be reliably used for local purposes. Here, we propose a comprehensive analysis of statistical univariate and multivariate, as well as machine learning methods for bias correction, which are compared on different temporal scales, ranging from hourly time steps to monthly aggregations, in an environment of complex Alpine orthography, using ERA5-Land reanalysis data. The results reveal different trends in the performance of the bias correction methods for precipitation and temperature across the various time resolutions.
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.