ArticlePloS one2025
Protocol for extracting flow hydrograph shape metrics for use in time-series flood hydrology analysis.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The shape characteristics of flow hydrographs hold essential information for understanding, monitoring and assessing changes in flow and flood hydrology at reach and catchment scales. However, the analysis of individual hydrographs is time consuming, making the analysis of hundreds or thousands of them unachievable. A method or protocol is needed to ensure that the datasets being generated, and the metrics produced, have been consistently derived and validated. In this lab protocol, we present workflows in Python for extracting flow hydrographs with any available temporal resolution from any Open Access or publicly available gauging station records. The workflow identifies morphologically-defined flow and flood types (i.e. in-channel fresh, high flow and overbank flood) and uses them to classify hydrographs. It then calculates several at-a-station and upstream-to-downstream hydrograph shape metrics including kurtosis, skewness, peak hydrograph stage, peak arrival time, rate-of-rise, peak-to-peak travel time, flood wave celerity, flood peak attenuation, and flood wave attenuation index. Some metrics require GIS-derived data, such as catchment area and upstream-to-downstream channel distance between gauges. The output dataset provides quantified hydrograph shape metrics which can be used to track changes in flow and flood hydrographs over time, or to characterise the flow and flood hydrology of catchments and regions. The workflows are flexible enough to allow for additional hydrograph shape indicators to be added or swapped out, or to use a different hydrograph classification method that suits local conditions. The protocol could be considered a change detection tool to identify where changes in hydrology are occurring and where to target more sophisticated modelling exercises to explain the changes detected. We demonstrate the workflow using 117 Open Access gauging station records that are available for coastal rivers of New South Wales (NSW), Australia.
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.