ArticleThe Lancet regional health. Europe2025
Carbon emissions from clinical activities by speciality in secondary and tertiary care in England: an exploratory cross-sectional analysis of routine administrative data.
Article in The Lancet regional health. Europe, 2025. 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.
- Environmental impact of NanoNeedle arthroscopy versus conventional knee arthroscopy: a hybrid carbon footprint analysis.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Healthcare waste: from incineration to pyrolysis: a comparative life cycle assessment of two different healthcare plastic waste management processes.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Our power, our planet: medicine and environmental stewardship.Singapore medical journal · 2026Article
- Review
- Can Care Continue While Nature is Depleted? A Qualitative Study on Ecological Footprint Awareness and Nursing Practices.Public health nursing (Boston, Mass.)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The National Health Service (NHS) in England has committed to achieving net zero carbon emissions by 2045. A key early step in this journey is to understand where opportunities to decarbonise healthcare exist. The aim of this paper is to explore the potential to use available activity and emissions intensity data to investigate the carbon emissions of different specialty-level clinical activities in secondary and tertiary care in the NHS in England. Methods: This was an exploratory, cross-sectional analysis of routine administrative data from secondary and tertiary care in the NHS in England. We included data for all patients admitted to hospital (including outpatient attendances, but excluding emergency attendances without subsequent admission) in England during the financial year 2022/23. The Hospital Episodes Statistics dataset and Theatre Productivity Data Collection were used. Carbon emissions factors were taken from published sources and linked to activity volumes to quantify the carbon emissions at a clinical activity level. Findings: Data for 17,024,278 hospital admissions and 101,973,593 outpatient attendances were analysed. Outpatient attendances accounted for 45% of the measured carbon emissions. Of the remaining 55% relating to admitted patient care, emergency admissions accounted for 45% (82% of admitted patient care), in-patient elective activity 7% and day case activity 3%. The top 20 clinical specialties accounted for 79% of the carbon emissions, with general internal medicine, trauma and orthopaedics and general surgery the three highest carbon emitting specialties. Interpretation: These data provide insight into the carbon emissions of specific elements of secondary and tertiary care activity in England. Such activity-level (and even more granular procedure-level and patient pathway-level) analysis is needed to inform carbon hotspot identification, intervention development and implementation to reduce the carbon emissions of care. As more granular data become available (e.g., on pharmaceutical use), such estimates will become more comprehensive. Funding: This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
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.