ReviewCambridge prisms. Coastal futures2025
Closing the parachute and opening the umbrella: Strategies for inclusivity and representation in producing impactful coastal ecosystem research.
Review in Cambridge prisms. Coastal futures, 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
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Parachute science is the problematic and extractive practice of non-local researchers taking data, knowledge and information from communities of which they are not members, failing to engage the local community and local scientists, marginalizing them in most aspects of the research, and using the results to their own benefit. Perpetuated by colonialism and unequal access to resources such as funding, education and data, it is harmful to local scientists and undervalues the contributions of the community as a whole. Ultimately, it erodes trust within the scientific community and, more broadly, builds dependence on foreign researchers and makes science less global and collaborative. Increasing international and cross-cultural collaborations while being careful to avoid parachute science can help minimize these impacts. Here, we offer our perspectives on parachute science and suggestions on how to avoid it, based on our experiences conducting research internationally with diverse scientists and communities, including both academics and non-academics. Instead of a parachute, we suggest opening the scientific "umbrella" to incorporate diverse perspectives and local contributions in generating relevant and impactful scientific insight.
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.