ArticleScientific reports2025
Presentation and analysis of the Geotechnical Coastal Vulnerability Index and validation of its application to coastal erosion problems.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Influence of soil porosity on hydraulic properties in dike failure induced by overtopping.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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aims to construct a coastal vulnerability assessment conceptual framework to improve the outcomes of Coastal Vulnerability Index (CVI) for local scale areas. Consequently, a new CVI was created adapted to the specific conditions of the area using seven variables. The new index was named Geotechnical Coastal Vulnerability Index (GCVI) due to the incorporation of two new geotechnical variables: (1) Coastal geotechnical properties and (2) Median grain size distribution. Furthermore, Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (FAHP) and Principal Component Analysis (PCA) were applied in the methodology to assign weight factors to each variable. For the verification of the GCVI predictions, a validation approach is applied using two different variables (rate of Historical shoreline movement and rate of Bed level change). GCVI results for both FAHP and PCA indicates that the greatest part of the study's area shoreline is under the regime of high and very high vulnerability. Comparison between the GCVI
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.