ArticleEnvironmental management2026
Lessons Learned from a Hybrid Approach to Collecting User Feedback on Coastal Science Products.
Article in Environmental management, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Science products play a critical role in assisting environmental decision-makers to manage coastal systems; yet there are challenges to developing products that align with needs of end-users. By combining aspects of usability testing and contextual inquiry methods, we describe a hybrid approach for collecting user feedback, especially applicable within the federal government context. This paper presents results of this hybrid testing approach on two of U.S. Geological Survey's science products, the Coastal Change Likelihood (CCL) and Hazard Exposure Reporting and Analytics (HERA). Both science products synthesize coastal hazard exposure at different geographies and scales. By comparing two science products in different stages of development, we identify common usability issues across both products; the importance of defining a target audience; requested functionalities beyond the products' scope; and the effect of previous stakeholder engagement on how testers describe technical issues and barriers. Results from user feedback contribute to understanding needs and barriers of coastal decision-makers for science product development. This paper broadens the understanding of environmental decision-makers in the science product development cycle, and how social dimensions can be integrated in project design through iteratively working with end-users and product developers. Further, we present general lessons in usability for development cycles and how these lessons can inform development of actionable science products in coastal management.
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.