ReviewDeveloping world bioethics2026
Anaesthesia Waste Gases and Bioethics: Balancing Patient Care, Environmental Responsibility, and Occupational Safety.
Review in Developing world bioethics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Anaesthesia waste gases (AWGs) represent a significant yet often overlooked contributor to healthcare's environmental footprint, with implications extending beyond ecological concerns to encompass occupational hazards and complex ethical considerations. This article examines the intersection of AWGs and bioethics through the framework of environmental stewardship, occupational health principles, patient-centered care, and distributive justice. Contemporary volatile anaesthetics possess global warming potentials thousands of times greater than carbon dioxide, while implicated occupational exposures raise concerns about reproductive health and neurological function among healthcare workers. The bioethical paradigms of principalism-encompassing nonmaleficence, beneficence, autonomy, and justice-and environmental ethics provide structured approaches to addressing these multifaceted challenges. This review synthesizes current evidence regarding AWGs' environmental and occupational impacts, evaluates emerging mitigation strategies, and proposes an integrated ethical framework to guide clinical practice, institutional policy, and professional standards in anaesthesiology.
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.