Which of the following is a method for analyzing changes in test coverage?

Analyzing changes in test coverage is crucial in understanding how effectively the testing process addresses potential risks and requirements in the software being tested. Evaluating existing test cases for relevance is a systematic approach that allows testers to determine if the current test cases still align with the updated specifications, requirements, or features of the system.

This method involves reviewing and assessing the test cases in light of any modifications made in the software, ensuring that every aspect of the application is being adequately tested. This evaluation might consider factors like the introduction of new functionalities, the removal of features, or changes in user requirements, thus directly linking to how test coverage might change.

In contrast, conducting team meetings, relying solely on user feedback, or implementing automated test execution do not directly assess the appropriateness or effectiveness of existing test cases in relation to the changes made in the software. Meetings can help with communication and strategy but don't analyze coverage directly; user feedback might point out issues but doesn't quantify test coverage; and while automation aids in execution, it doesn't inherently address the evaluation of test cases' relevance to recent changes. This makes the evaluation of existing test cases the most effective method for analyzing changes in test coverage.