Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37064423›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental epidemiology (Philadelphia, Pa.)2023

It's electric! An environmental equity perspective on the lifecycle of our energy sources.

Mary D Willis, Lara J Cushing, Jonathan J Buonocore, Nicole C Deziel, Joan A Casey

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental epidemiology (Philadelphia, Pa.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

5 authors.

Mary D WillisDepartment of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0247-7983
Lara J CushingDepartment of Environmental Health Sciences, Fielding School of Public Health, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California.
Jonathan J BuonocoreCenter for Climate, Health, and the Global Environment, T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Nicole C DezielDepartment of Environmental Health Sciences, School of Public Health, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut.
Joan A CaseyDepartment of Environmental Health Sciences, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, New York.

Funding

Yale Clinical and Translational Science Award (U Component)UL1TR001863 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI John H. Krystal, LUCILA OHNO-MACHADO · 2016 to 2026
$102.9M
XENOBIOTIC BIOTRANSFORMATION AND DISPOSITIONP30ES007033 · NIEHS · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI Nicole Ann Errett · 1995 to 2026
$42.5M
A Preconception Cohort Study on Oil and Gas Development, Fertility, and PregnancyDP5OD033415 · OD · BOSTON UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CAMPUS · PI WILLIS, MARY D · 2022 to 2025
$2.2M
The Impact of Unconventional Natural Gas Development on Maternal, Perinatal, and Childhood Health: an Electronic Health Record ApproachR00ES027023 · NIEHS · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI CASEY, JOAN A · 2019 to 2021
$747k
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001863NIEHS NIH HHS P30 ES007033NIEHS NIH HHS R00 ES027023NIH HHS DP5 OD033415
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Energy policy decisions are driven primarily by economic and reliability considerations, with limited consideration given to public health, environmental justice, and climate change. Moreover, epidemiologic studies relevant for public policy typically focus on immediate public health implications of activities related to energy procurement and generation, considering less so health equity or the longer-term health consequences of climate change attributable to an energy source. A more integrated, collective consideration of these three domains can provide more robust guidance to policymakers, communities, and individuals. Here, we illustrate how these domains can be evaluated with respect to natural gas as an energy source. Our process began with a detailed overview of all relevant steps in the process of extracting, producing, and consuming natural gas. We synthesized existing epidemiologic and complementary evidence of how these processes impact public health, environmental justice, and climate change. We conclude that, in certain domains, natural gas looks beneficial (e.g., economically for some), but when considered more expansively, through the life cycle of natural gas and joint lenses of public health, environmental justice, and climate change, natural gas is rendered an undesirable energy source in the United States. A holistic climate health equity framework can inform how we value and deploy different energy sources in the service of public health.

Identifiers

PMID37064423
PMCPMC10097546

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.