Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39360234›Full record

ReviewHealth data science2024

Health Co-Benefits of Environmental Changes in the Context of Carbon Peaking and Carbon Neutrality in China.

Feifei Zhang, Chao Yang, Fulin Wang, Pengfei Li, Luxia Zhang

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Health data science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
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.

Feifei ZhangNational Institute of Health Data Science at Peking University, Health Science Center of Peking University, Beijing 100191, China.
Chao YangRenal Division, Department of Medicine, Peking University First Hospital, Peking University Institute of Nephrology, Beijing 100034, China.
Fulin WangNational Institute of Health Data Science at Peking University, Health Science Center of Peking University, Beijing 100191, China.
Pengfei LiAdvanced Institute of Information Technology, Peking University, Hangzhou 311215, China.
Luxia ZhangNational Institute of Health Data Science at Peking University, Health Science Center of Peking University, Beijing 100191, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2349-2936

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

importanceClimate change mitigation policies aimed at limiting greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions would bring substantial health co-benefits by directly alleviating climate change or indirectly reducing air pollution. As one of the largest developing countries and GHG emitter globally, China's carbon-peaking and carbon neutrality goals would lead to substantial co-benefits on global environment and therefore on human health. This review summarized the key findings and gaps in studies on the impact of China's carbon mitigation strategies on human health. HIGHLIGHTS: There is a wide consensus that limiting the temperature rise well below 2 °C would markedly reduce the climate-related health impacts compared with high emission scenario, although heat-related mortalities, labor productivity reduction rates, and infectious disease morbidities would continue increasing over time as temperature rises. Further, hundreds of thousands of air pollutant-related mortalities (mainly due to PM

conclusionsThis review provides up-to-date evidence of potential health co-benefits under Chinese carbon policies and highlights the importance of considering these co-benefits into future climate policy development in both China and other nations endeavoring carbon reductions.

Identifiers

PMID39360234
PMCPMC11446102

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.