Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41080855›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2025

Health benefits versus economic costs: welfare analysis of energy conservation and emission reduction.

Hongkun Zhao, Zhuo Chen, Nan Feng

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 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

3 authors.

Hongkun Zhao *School of Economics, Liaoning University, Shenyang, China.
Zhuo Chen *School of Economics and Management, Inner Mongolia Normal University, Hohhot, China.
Nan FengSchool of Economics and Management, Inner Mongolia Normal University, Hohhot, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: A multidimensional and comprehensive evaluation of the impact of energy conservation and emission reduction (ECER) on residents' health and welfare is conducive to resolving conflicts between economy and environment on a worldwide scale. Methods: Based on China's ECER demonstration city policy, this paper uses a staggered difference-in-differences method to examine the impact of ECER on residents' health and labor market performance, and conservatively estimates the welfare effect of ECER in conjunction with a theoretical model. Results: The results show that ECER significantly improves residents' health, raises self-rated health ( Conclusion: Future policies should progressively move towards an integrated assessment of the costs and benefits of ECER, paying particular attention to welfare losses among groups that bear higher costs.

Indexed as

Conservation of Energy ResourcesHealth StatusSocial WelfareChinaCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansa longitudinal studyenergy conservation and emission reductionhealth effectlabor market performancewelfare analysis

Identifiers

PMID41080855
PMCPMC12511090

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.