ArticleJamba (Potchefstroom, South Africa)2025
A review of technical and social methods for observing and monitoring extreme rainfall events.
Article in Jamba (Potchefstroom, South Africa), 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent extreme weather events driven by climatic variation and change have severely impacted infrastructure, human life, and ecosystems globally, increasing the urgency for Early Warning Systems (EWS) and hybrid methods to observe extreme rainfall events. This article reviews existing studies on technical and social methods for monitoring extreme rainfall to explore the integration of these approaches in rainfall observation. Given the limitations of technical and social methods when used in isolation, it has become evident that hybrid approaches that integrate social and technical methods could enhance preparedness for catastrophic rainfall events. Therefore, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses method was employed to identify and analyse studies on rainfall observation. A total of 3786 articles were identified from different databases, and after applying various filters, 144 studies were selected and analysed to improve our understanding of rainfall monitoring approaches. The key findings of this review indicate four main trends: (1) technical methods dominate over social methods because of their perceived reliability and precision; (2) in the Global North, only technical methods are used, with no recorded studies incorporating social approaches; (3) social methods, along with integrated approaches, are more prevalent in the Global South; and (4) integrated methods remain limited despite their potential to enhance rainfall monitoring. This review provides insights into the benefits of combining technical and social methods, highlighting their complementary strengths. By bridging the gap between high-tech solutions and community-based monitoring, integrating these approaches could improve EWS and strengthen climate resilience. Contribution: This review addresses the gap in integrating technical and social methods for rainfall monitoring, emphasising their complementary strengths. It highlights the limited use of integrated approaches, particularly in the Global North, despite their potential to enhance EWS. This research advocates for inclusive and effective climate risk management by bridging high-tech solutions with community-based monitoring.
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.