Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27835959›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental health : a global access science source2016

Current medical research funding and frameworks are insufficient to address the health risks of global environmental change.

Kristie L Ebi, Jan C Semenza, Joacim Rocklöv

Open access · goldAbstract readLetter
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental health : a global access science source, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Urban Climate Policy and Action through a Health Lens-An Untapped Opportunity.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Science Policy to Advance a Climate Change and Health Research Agenda in the United States.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Kristie L EbiDepartment of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA. krisebi@essllc.org.
Jan C SemenzaStockholm Environmental Institute, Linnégatan 87D, 115 23, Stockholm, Sweden.
Joacim RocklövDepartment of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Umea University, Umea, Sweden.
Stockholm Environment Institute · SEUmeå University · SEUniversity of Washington · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThree major international agreements signed in 2015 are key milestones for transitioning to more sustainable and resilient societies: the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development; the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction; and the Paris Agreement under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Together, these agreements underscore the critical importance of understanding and managing the health risks of global changes, to ensure continued population health improvements in the face of significant social and environmental change over this century. BODY: Funding priorities of major health institutions and organizations in the U.S. and Europe do not match research investments with needs to inform implementation of these international agreements. In the U.S., the National Institutes of Health commit 0.025 % of their annual research budget to climate change and health. The European Union Seventh Framework Programme committed 0.08 % of the total budget to climate change and health; the amount committed under Horizon 2020 was 0.04 % of the budget. Two issues apparently contributing to this mismatch are viewing climate change primarily as an environmental problem, and therefore the responsibility of other research streams; and narrowly framing research into managing the health risks of climate variability and change from the perspective of medicine and traditional public health. This reductionist, top-down perspective focuses on proximate, individual level risk factors. While highly successful in reducing disease burdens, this framing is insufficient to protect health and well-being over a century that will be characterized by profound social and environmental changes.

conclusionsInternational commitments in 2015 underscored the significant challenges societies will face this century from climate change and other global changes. However, the low priority placed on understanding and managing the associated health risks by national and international research institutions and organizations leaves populations poorly prepared to cope with changing health burdens. Risk-centered, systems approaches can facilitate understanding of the complex interactions and dependencies across environmental, social, and human systems. This understanding is needed to formulate effective interventions targeting socio-environmental factors that are as important for determining health burdens as are individual risk factors.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchClimate ChangePublic HealthHumansResearch Support as TopicClimate changeFundingGlobal changeHuman health

Identifiers

PMID27835959
PMCPMC5106817
OpenAlexW2553077433

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.