ArticleBMC health services research2025
Implementing climate-sensitive health counselling: a qualitative study with physicians in Germany.
Article in BMC health services research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo protect human health, it is important to improve climate-resilience and mitigate climate change and environmental degradation. Health systems can contribute to this by providing climate-resilient and sustainable health services. One example of such a health service is climate-sensitive health counselling (CSHC), which is defined as communication with patients about climate change and health issues within clinical settings. In this study, we explore how physicians in Germany conduct CSHC and what supports them in doing so with the purpose to better conceptualize CSHC and give recommendations on how to support its implementation.
methodsWe conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews in 2021 with 18 German physicians mainly working in the outpatient sector, who were already conducting CSHC or thought about doing so. The interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. A mixed deductive and inductive approach of qualitative content analysis was used for the analysis, supported by NVivo software. The deductive analysis part was guided by the framework on CSHC, and by work on factors that influence the implementation of patient-centered communication.
resultsThe way in which participants conducted CSHC was broadly aligned with the existing framework for CSHC. With regard to the frameworks’ three content areas (’health impacts and adaptation’, ‘healthy and sustainable lifestyles’ and ‘climate action and policy’), there was an emphasis on lifestyle counselling in this sample. Furthermore, a fourth content area on clinical-decision making was discussed. The most important communication strategies mentioned fitted to principles of patient-centered communication. Enabling factors for implementing CSHC were mentioned on all pre-defined levels (physician, patient, relationship and health system factors). Developing an inner attitude, positive experienced patient response and being aware of touchpoints for CSHC were mentioned as physician factors supporting implementation of CSHC by participants.
conclusionsThis study demonstrates that participating physicians already implement CSHC as a sustainable healthcare service. As physician factors seem to be important enabling factors for implementing CSHC, we argue that training physicians in medical curricula and continued medical education are important to support implementation of CSHC. Reflections about the own attitude towards climate change and health and teaching about patient-centered communication strategies could be important elements of such trainings. Future research should consider the expansion of the CSHC framework with regard to clinical decision-making and validate or expand the framework for different medical specializations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.