Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40553366›Full record

ReviewApplied health economics and health policy2025

Priority Setting in the Context of Planetary Healthcare.

Glory O Apantaku, Lydia Kapiriri, Ole F Norheim, Ingrid Cardoso Couto de Azevedo, Dan Kim, Martin Hensher, Jaithri Ananthapavan, Anand Bhopal, Andrea J MacNeill, Jodi D Sherman and 1 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Applied health economics and health policy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

11 authors.

Glory O ApantakuCentre for Clinical Epidemiology and Evaluation, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
Lydia KapiririMcMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
Ole F NorheimBergen Centre for Ethics and Priority Setting in Health (BCEPS), University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Ingrid Cardoso Couto de AzevedoBergen Centre for Ethics and Priority Setting in Health (BCEPS), University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Dan KimCentre for Clinical Epidemiology and Evaluation, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
Martin HensherUniversity of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.
Jaithri AnanthapavanDeakin Health Economics, Deakin University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Anand BhopalBergen Centre for Ethics and Priority Setting in Health (BCEPS), University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Andrea J MacNeillCentre for Clinical Epidemiology and Evaluation, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
Jodi D ShermanYale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
Craig MittonCentre for Clinical Epidemiology and Evaluation, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada. craig.mitton@ubc.ca.ORCID 0000-0001-7871-8977

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The realities of ecosystem breakdown and climate change pose a significant threat to the health of individuals around the world, disproportionately affecting poor and vulnerable populations. Every sector in society, including healthcare, needs to be engaged in the tremendous collective effort and transformational change needed to limit global warming. We see priority setting as having a key role to play in reallocating existing budgets within healthcare systems whilst at the same time being used to facilitate sustainable and more efficient resource allocation across countries. Priority setting looks to fairly distribute resources with the goal of improving patient and population health outcomes. However, these goals can be broadened to include consideration of environmental impact based on our understanding of the necessity of emissions reduction to address the climate crisis and promote population health. In this paper, we introduce key concepts of priority setting and identify the interplay between priority setting and the realities of resource scarcity in the realm of planetary healthcare. We propose that applying priority-setting principles could serve at least three goals; (1) protect and improve health outcomes; (2) limit unnecessary and marginal care; and (3) facilitate a just transition to a sustainable healthcare system.

Indexed as

Climate ChangeDelivery of Health CareHealth PrioritiesGlobal HealthHumansResource Allocation

Identifiers

PMID40553366
PMCPMC12535943

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.