Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40556417›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of technology assessment in health care2025

Environmental considerations in health technology assessments performed by Canadian agencies.

Elodie Bénard, Komi Edem Gatovo, Jason Robert Guertin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of technology assessment in health care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Competencies for health technology assessment professionals: a scoping review and content analysis.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
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

3 authors.

Elodie Bénardhttps://ror.org/04rgqcd02Centre de recherche du CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Québec City, Québec, Canada.
Komi Edem Gatovohttps://ror.org/04rgqcd02Centre de recherche du CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Québec City, Québec, Canada.
Jason Robert Guertinhttps://ror.org/04rgqcd02Centre de recherche du CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Québec City, Québec, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1718-5307

Funding

Stem Cell Network F-115105
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesGlobally, several health technology assessment (HTA) agencies have started to incorporate environmental considerations into their assessments, given healthcare systems' substantial environmental footprint. In Canada, two HTA agencies, the Canadian Drug Agency and the Institut national d'excellence en santé et en services sociaux, have announced measures to help mitigate healthcare's contribution to climate change. Our aim was to review reports from both agencies to identify those incorporating environmental considerations.

methodsWe retrieved reports published between 1 May 2023 and 1 December 2024 by the two agencies.

resultsWe identifed 202 reports, of which eleven were included. These reports covered diverse technologies, with greenhouse gas emissions and waste production being the most frequently considered environmental dimensions. Parallel evaluation was the predominant method for integrating environmental considerations. We believe that the limited number of reports included may reflect the challenges of incorporating such considerations into HTAs.

conclusionBy addressing these challenges, HTA agencies could play a pivotal role in guiding decisions that align with environmental goals.

Indexed as

EnvironmentTechnology Assessment, BiomedicalCanadaClimate ChangeGreenhouse GasesHumansGreenhouse GasesCanadaenvironmentguidelineshealth technology assessmentreview

Identifiers

PMID40556417
PMCPMC12226197

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.