Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40744058›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2025

Environmental Impact of Online Versus in-Person Critical Care Education Through the Carbon Footprint Analysis of the CERTAIN Program: Cross-Sectional Study.

Baiyong Wang, Claudia Castillo Zambrano, Nasrin Nikravangolsefid, Ricardo Machado Carvalhais, Alexander Niven, Ognjen Gajic, Yue Dong

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

7 authors.

Baiyong WangDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, the Affiliated Hospital of Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou, China.ORCID 0009-0002-7704-9817
Claudia Castillo ZambranoDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-9469-6656
Nasrin NikravangolsefidDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-1362-6769
Ricardo Machado CarvalhaisDepartment of Internal Medicine, Montefiore New Rochelle Hospital, New Rochelle, NY, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-8022-9029
Alexander NivenDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-0891-9495
Ognjen GajicDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-4218-0890
Yue DongDepartment of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Mayo Clinic, 1216 2nd St SW, Rochester, MN, 55092, United States, 1 5073228432.ORCID 0000-0002-1737-6536

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Climate change is a pressing public health issue, with the US health care sector contributing about 479 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) annually. Online continuing medical education offers an alternative solution to increase global education delivery while reducing CO2 emissions associated with traditional teaching methods. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) emissions associated with different delivery methods of the CERTAIN (Checklist for Early Recognition and Treatment of Acute Illness and Injury) global critical care education program. Specifically, we aimed to compare the climate impact of local in-person courses in Rochester, MN, international in-person courses, and online courses to determine the potential environmental benefits of transitioning to digital education platforms. Methods: A cross-sectional analysis of CO2e emissions linked to the CERTAIN program was conducted from 2016 to 2022. We compared the climate impact of 3 different course offerings: local in-person at Rochester, MN, international in-person courses, and online courses. The international conferences were conducted in the host country with faculty traveling there to provide the educational content. CO2e emissions were calculated using the "My Climate Flight Calculator" and "Environmental Protection Agency Emission Factors" formulas for travel, conference venues, and online course-related emissions. Learner satisfaction was assessed via validated 5-point Likert surveys. Results: Local courses had the highest emissions: 52.7 tons/course (2.5 tons/participant), 96% from air travel (50.6tons, P<.001), versus other formats. International courses showed 20.2 tons/course (0.4 tons/participant), of which 93%(18.8 tons) were travel-related. Online courses reduced emissions by 96% per capita (0.1 tons/participant, P<.001) and 89% per course (5.6 tons, P<.001) versus local format. Overall course ratings were either excellent (live 50%, n=136) vs online 44%, n=11) or very good (live 30.9%, n=84 vs online 53%, n=12) for both live and online courses. Conclusions: The transition to online delivery of our CERTAIN global education program has led to a substantial reduction in CO2 emissions, mainly by eliminating travel, with similar levels of learner satisfaction. These findings support a strategic shift toward digital medical education platforms to promote environmental responsibility and broaden global educational access.

Indexed as

Carbon FootprintCritical CareEducation, DistanceEducation, Medical, ContinuingCarbon DioxideClimate ChangeCross-Sectional StudiesHumansCarbon Dioxidecarbon dioxide equivalent emissionscarbon footprintclimate changeCO2e emissionscontinuing medical educationdigital educationeLearningenvironmentglobal healthmedical educationpublic health

Identifiers

PMID40744058
PMCPMC12313308

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.