Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41235184›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2025

The 10th anniversary of the Paris agreement on climate: unmet goals and unanswered questions.

Paolo Vineis, Raimondo Orsini, Giorgio Vacchiano

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. 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

3 authors.

Paolo Vineis *Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Raimondo OrsiniFondazione per lo Sviluppo Sostenibile, Roma, Italy.
Giorgio Vacchiano *Università Statale, Milano, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The contribution of interventions for mitigation of climate change in different sectors has been evaluated by IPCC in their 6th report (AR6) and by the International Energy Agency (IEA), among others. However, these scientific evaluations have not been translated into a systematic, overall appraisal, that combines the few quantified targets, such as greenhouse gas emissions and temperature trajectories, with broader but less quantified dimensions such as feasibility, equity, justice, co-benefits (including health), and acceptability. These aspects remain fragmented or insufficiently assessed at the global scale, as a large number of questions are still open on the suitability of different mitigation measures. Progress has been made in certain sectors, such as the phase-out of coal in many countries; the first substantial consideration of health at COP27 and the growing attention to its impacts; the renewed focus on Net Zero commitments; the launch of the European Union's "Fit for 55" package, toward which the EU is nearly on track as of 2025; and the recognition of the need to connect climate action with local benefits, including for health. But such progress is still insufficient. The purpose of this perspective is to identify gaps in a coordinated international action, and in particular the open questions concerning priorities and feasibility of different mitigation strategies, with special emphasis on health.

Indexed as

Climate ChangeInternational CooperationGoalsHumansParisco-benefitsCOPhealthlow-income countriesmitigation solutionsnationally determined contributionstechnology

Identifiers

PMID41235184
PMCPMC12605487

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.