ArticleFrontiers in public health2024
Healthcare-related carbon footprinting-lower impact of a coronary stenting compared to a coronary surgery pathway.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Twin Transformation in Cardiothoracic Surgery: The Convergence of Digital Innovation and Sustainability.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2026Review
- Experts' recommendations for the management of adult patients with cardiogenic shock.Annals of intensive care · 2026Article
- Towards Green Cardiovascular Care: Carbon Footprint Analysis in the Management of Coronary Artery Disease.Korean circulation journal · 2026Article
- Contribution of hospitals and clinical services to global warming: a scoping systematic review.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Applying Abstract Text Mining as a Complement to PRISMA in Reviewing the Scope of Healthcare's Circular Economy Comment on "A Review of the Applicability of Current Green Practices in Healthcare Facilities".International journal of health policy and management · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Healthcare is a major generator of greenhouse gases, so consideration of this contribution to climate change needs to be quantified in ways that can inform models of care. Given the availability of activity-based financial data, environmentally-extended input-output (EEIO) analysis can be employed to calculate systemic carbon footprints for healthcare activities, allowing comparison of different patient care pathways. We thus quantified and compared the carbon footprint of two common care pathways for patients with stable coronary artery disease, with similar clinical outcomes: coronary stenting and coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG). Healthcare cost data for these two pathways were disaggregated and the carbon footprint associated with this expenditure was calculated by connecting the flow of money within the economy to the greenhouse gases emitted to support the full range of associated activities. The systemic carbon footprint associated with an average stable patient CABG pathway, at a large tertiary referral hospital in Sydney, Australia in 2021-22, was 11.5 tonnes CO
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.