Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39063397›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2024

Mapping the Environmental Co-Benefits of Reducing Low-Value Care: A Scoping Review and Bibliometric Analysis.

Gillian Parker, Sarah Hunter, Karen Born, Fiona A Miller

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2024. 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. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  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

4 authors.

Gillian ParkerCollaborative Centre for Climate, Health & Sustainable Care, Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5T 3M6, Canada.
Sarah HunterCollaborative Centre for Climate, Health & Sustainable Care, Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5T 3M6, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-5346-8382
Karen BornCollaborative Centre for Climate, Health & Sustainable Care, Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5T 3M6, Canada.
Fiona A MillerCollaborative Centre for Climate, Health & Sustainable Care, Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5T 3M6, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-4953-6255

Funding

University of Toronto N/A
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Reducing low-value care (LVC) and improving healthcare's climate readiness are critical factors for improving the sustainability of health systems. Care practices that have been deemed low or no-value generate carbon emissions, waste and pollution without improving patient or population health. There is nascent, but growing, research and evaluation to inform practice change focused on the environmental co-benefits of reducing LVC. The objective of this study was to develop foundational knowledge of this field through a scoping review and bibliometric analysis. We searched four databases, Medline, Embase, Scopus and CINAHL, and followed established scoping review and bibliometric analysis methodology to collect and analyze the data. A total of 145 publications met the inclusion criteria and were published between 2013 and July 2023, with over 80% published since 2020. Empirical studies comprised 21%, while commentary or opinions comprised 51% of publications. The majority focused on healthcare generally (27%), laboratory testing (14%), and medications (14%). Empirical publications covered a broad range of environmental issues with general and practice-specific 'Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions', 'waste management' and 'resource use' as most common topics. Reducing practice-specific 'GHG emissions' was the most commonly reported environmental outcome. The bibliometric analysis revealed nine international collaboration networks producing work on eight key healthcare areas. The nineteen 'top' authors were primarily from the US, Australia and Canada.

Indexed as

BibliometricsDelivery of Health CareHumansbibliometric analysisco-benefitsenvironmental sustainabilityhealthcarelow-value carescoping review

Identifiers

PMID39063397
PMCPMC11276457

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.