Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35613000›Full record

ArticleTranslational behavioral medicine2022

Evidence-based recommendations for communicating the impacts of climate change on health.

Ellen Peters, Patrick Boyd, Linda D Cameron, Noshir Contractor, Michael A Diefenbach, Sara Fleszar-Pavlovic, Ezra Markowitz, Renee N Salas, Keri K Stephens

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Translational behavioral medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Self-Protection Motivation and Its Psychological Construction: A Process Model Distinguishing Two Unique Motivational Orientations.Personality and social psychology review : an official journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

9 authors.

Ellen PetersCenter for Science Communication Research, School of Journalism and Communication, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0702-6169
Patrick BoydBehavioral Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9950-2745
Linda D CameronDepartment of Psychological Sciences, University of California, Merced, Merced, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1874-3526
Noshir ContractorDepartments of Industrial Engineering and Management Sciences, Management and Organizations, and Communication Studies, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9989-3018
Michael A DiefenbachInstitute for Health System Science at the Feinstein Institutes for Medical Research, Northwell Health, Manhasset, NY, USA.
Sara Fleszar-PavlovicDepartment of Psychological Sciences, University of California, Merced, Merced, CA, USA.
Ezra MarkowitzDepartment of Environmental Conservation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, USA.
Renee N SalasHarvard Medical School, Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA.
Keri K StephensTechnology & Information Policy Institute, Communication Studies, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9526-2331

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Climate change poses a multifaceted, complex, and existential threat to human health and well-being, but efforts to communicate these threats to the public lag behind what we know how to do in communication research. Effective communication about climate change's health risks can improve a wide variety of individual and population health-related outcomes by: (1) helping people better make the connection between climate change and health risks and (2) empowering them to act on that newfound knowledge and understanding. The aim of this manuscript is to highlight communication methods that have received empirical support for improving knowledge uptake and/or driving higher-quality decision making and healthier behaviors and to recommend how to apply them at the intersection of climate change and health. This expert consensus about effective communication methods can be used by healthcare professionals, decision makers, governments, the general public, and other stakeholders including sectors outside of health. In particular, we argue for the use of 11 theory-based, evidence-supported communication strategies and practices. These methods range from leveraging social networks to making careful choices about the use of language, narratives, emotions, visual images, and statistics. Message testing with appropriate groups is also key. When implemented properly, these approaches are likely to improve the outcomes of climate change and health communication efforts.

Indexed as

Climate ChangeCommunicationEmotionsHumansClimate changeClimate change and healthCommunicationHealth and well-beingHealth disparitiesPolitical action

Identifiers

PMID35613000
PMCPMC9274986

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.