Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41315513›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

A national model for estimating United States public land visitation.

Nathaniel H Merrill, Samantha G Winder, Dieta R Hanson, Spencer A Wood, Eric M White

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Nathaniel H MerrillMatunuck Research Group, Matunuck, RI, USA. nate@matunuckresearch.com.
Samantha G WinderOutdoor Recreation & Data Lab, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Dieta R HansonOutdoor Recreation & Data Lab, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Spencer A WoodOutdoor Recreation & Data Lab, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Eric M WhiteU.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Public land management relies on accurate visitor counts in order to understand and mitigate environmental impacts and to quantify the value of ecosystem services provided by natural areas. We build and test predictive visitation models suitable for publicly-managed parks, open space, and other protected lands based on multiple sources of digital mobility data including geotagged posts to social media platforms, community science observations, and a mobile device location dataset from a commercial vendor. Using observational visitation data series from the United States' National Park Service, Forest Service, and Fish and Wildlife Service, we quantify the accuracy of statistical models to predict on-the-ground visitation using individual and combined sources of mobility data alongside other covariates. We find the predictive models performed best in settings where some on-site visitation data can be integrated into the models. On-site visitation data helps to account for meaningful differences in modeled relationships both within and across the three agencies considered. We find variation in the usefulness of the digital mobility data sources, with models combining multiple data sources outperforming those using a single source, including those based solely on mobile device locations. We discuss the practical implications of these findings as well as paths forward to improve visitation estimation on public lands.

Indexed as

Conservation of Natural ResourcesModels, TheoreticalParks, RecreationalEcosystemHumansModels, StatisticalUnited StatesDigital mobility dataFederally managed landsOutdoor recreationPark visitation

Identifiers

PMID41315513
PMCPMC12663154

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.