Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40604563›Full record

ReviewBMC public health2025

"SCALE-up" - a new framework to assess the effectiveness of climate change adaptation interventions for human health and health systems.

Caradee Y Wright, Natasha Naidoo, Nalini Anand, Thandi Kapwata, Candice Webster

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC public health, 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. Review
  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

5 authors.

Caradee Y WrightEnvironment and Health Research Unit, South African Medical Research Council, SAMRC, 1 Soutpansberg Road, Pretoria, South Africa. caradee.wright@mrc.ac.za.
Natasha NaidooEnvironment and Health Research Unit, South African Medical Research Council, SAMRC, 1 Soutpansberg Road, Pretoria, South Africa.
Nalini AnandFogarty International Center, U.S. National Institutes of Health, 16 A Center Drive, MSC 6710, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA.
Thandi KapwataEnvironment and Health Research Unit, South African Medical Research Council, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Candice WebsterEnvironment and Health Research Unit, South African Medical Research Council, Cape Town, South Africa.

Funding

NIH HHS
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Climate change is a grave threat to human health and wellbeing. Adaptation is one mechanism (the other is mitigation) by which we can intervene to increase adaptive capacity and preparedness to protect people. Adaptation interventions (evidence-based adjustment of programs/practices that lead to improved response and resilience to climate change) are being conducted around the world. However, existing conceptual frameworks to assess the effectiveness of these interventions, especially with respect to improving health outcomes and systems are not readily applied in areas where these are needed. This is applicable to both interventions intended to improve health as well as those without a health-focus but which may have health co-benefits. To address this gap, we conducted a multi-vocal review comprised of a scoping review and key informant interviews, which informed the development of an initial assessment framework. We included 21 academic articles and 12 reports (from the grey literature) for data collation and synthesis. Of the 21 articles analyzed, only seven presented primary evidence of health improvement outcomes, such as reduction in neo-natal care unit admissions was partially attributed to moving the maternity ward to the cooler, lower floor of the hospital. From the 10 interviewees, we learnt that most existing tools to assess the effectiveness of adaptation are for country or regional (several countries sharing borders within a large section of a continent) scales (e.g., Notre Dame Global Adaptation Initiative Index) and none focused specifically on health / health co-benefits. From these learnings together with a guiding concept, we crafted the first iteration of an assessment framework, SCALE-up, comprising six steps that prompt a researcher to consider the effectiveness of their adaptation intervention at a project-scale, including from a health benefit perspective. We apply the framework in four scenarios: hot days-heat; floods; droughts; and vector-borne diseases, to illustrate how the framework may help guide the researcher to think about effectiveness from project proposal stage. The next steps are to implement and pilot the framework in the four proposed scenarios and refine the framework.

Indexed as

Climate ChangeDelivery of Health CareProgram EvaluationHumansClimate changeEnvironmental healthImpactsImplementation scienceIndicatorsMethodsMonitoring and evaluationStandardized measures

Identifiers

PMID40604563
PMCPMC12217367

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.