ArticleAmbio2026
A transdisciplinary approach to nuclear waste management: Opening research with a Citizens' Working Group.
Article in Ambio, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Science often tackles sustainability challenges by not only addressing them (inter-)disciplinary but additionally engaging in societal aspects through transdisciplinary research. Siting a deep-geological repository is a technical and societal challenge. In this study, we present a unique approach that entailed a 4 year collaboration between our research team and a Citizen's Working Group (CWG) on nuclear waste management in Germany. We explored whether and how knowledge could be effectively transferred among researchers and the CWG, as well as how mutual trust could be fostered and maintained. Seventeen ordinary citizens across Germany were selected via a multistep process, including an online survey and interviews. Their contributions provided valuable empirical insights and informed interdisciplinary research questions. We describe this new and challenging process with its multiple methods (surveys, workshops, observations, and interviews) and reflect on our experiences based on a rich set of empirical data. Finally, we discuss the potential for generalization and application of this approach to other topics.
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.