ReviewThe Lancet. Planetary health2020
Mapping the co-benefits of climate change action to issues of public concern in the UK: a narrative review.
Review in The Lancet. Planetary health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- From carbon reduction to care quality: a stakeholder-informed agenda for decarbonizing care homes.The Gerontologist · 2026Article
- What are the optimal strategies to communicate the risk of poor air quality exposure to vulnerable groups?Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Using doughnut economics to structure whole-system thinking with multidisciplinary stakeholders - a soft systems approach.Urban transformations · 2026Article
- Advancing equitable and sustainable urban health.Nature medicine · 2025Review
- Climate change and mental health: Position paper of the European Psychiatric Association.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2024Review
- Indoor Air Pollution and Lung Function Decline: "Should I Stay or Should I Go?"American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2023Article
- Factors and framing effects in support for net zero policies in the United Kingdom.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Climate change and the prevention of cardiovascular disease.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2022Review
- Hope, Coping and Eco-Anxiety: Young People's Mental Health in a Climate-Impacted Australia.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- COP26: Looking forward from Glasgow by placing health at the center of climate action.The journal of climate change and health · 2022Article
- Rule-Governed Behavior and Climate Change: Why Climate Warnings Fail to Motivate Sufficient Action.Behavior and social issues · 2022Article
- Realist evaluation of the implementation and impact of the NHS carbon reduction strategy in the UK.BMJ open · 2021Article
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
Abstract
To avoid a 1·5°C rise in global temperatures above preindustrial levels, the next phase of reductions in greenhouse gas emissions will need to be comparatively rapid. Linking the co-benefits of climate action to wider issues that the public are concerned about can help decision makers to prioritise decarbonisation options that increase the chance of public support for such changes, while ensuring that a just transition is delivered. We identified key issues of concern to the UK public by use of Ipsos MORI public opinion data from 2007 to 2020 and used these data to guide a narrative review of academic and grey literature on the co-benefits of climate change action for the UK. Correspondence with civil servants, third sector organisations, and relevant academics allowed us to identify omissions and to ensure policy relevance of the recommendations. This evidence-based Review of the various co-benefits of climate change action for the UK identifies four main areas: health and the National Health Service; security; economy and unemployment; and poverty, housing, and inequality. Associated trade-offs are also discussed. City-level and regional-level governments are particularly well placed to incorporate co-benefits into their decision making because it is at this scale that co-benefits most clearly manifest, and where interventions can have the most immediate effects.
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.