Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41499081›Full record

ArticleThe European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care2026

Points to consider for incorporating climate impacts into health economic evaluation.

Jule Oldenburg, Oliver Lange, Mattis Keil, Scott McAlister, Rachael Morton, Don Husereau, Wolf Rogowski

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care, 2026. 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.

Jule OldenburgDepartment of Health Care Management, Institute of Public Health and Nursing Research, Health Sciences, University of Bremen, 28359, Bremen, Germany. j.oldenburg@uni-bremen.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0004-5801-3821
Oliver LangeDepartment of Health Care Management, Institute of Public Health and Nursing Research, Health Sciences, University of Bremen, 28359, Bremen, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9780-7334
Mattis KeilDepartment of Health Care Management, Institute of Public Health and Nursing Research, Health Sciences, University of Bremen, 28359, Bremen, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0180-2358
Scott McAlisterFaculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8702-6374
Rachael MortonFaculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7834-0572
Don HusereauSchool of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4416-6876
Wolf RogowskiDepartment of Health Care Management, Institute of Public Health and Nursing Research, Health Sciences, University of Bremen, 28359, Bremen, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1625-4171

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesMethodological approaches for incorporating the external effects resulting from climate impacts into health economic evaluation (HEE) are a vivid field of research. Combining established standards for reporting HEE and climate footprints (CF), our aim is to develop a structured list of points to consider for reporting full HEE that combines the two methodologies, referred to as climate-extended HEE

methodsWe mapped a transparency catalogue with methodological items for estimating CF to the reporting items described in the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS). We identified synergies and developed a proposal of methodological points to report for climate-extended HEE, structured by the CHEERS items. The proposal was validated using three published climate-extended HEEs and a hypothetical case study..

resultsWe proposed extensions to 18 reporting items of CHEERS, for example, adding more detail to the measurement and valuation of resources and costs to facilitate a process- or cost-based estimation of CF. Using three identified publications and a hypothetical case study, examples on how all items could be addressed are provided, including a presentation of climate-extended versions of the standard summary measures of HEE.

conclusionsThe proposed catalogue can be used for reporting and reviewing climate-extended HEEs. Further work is necessary to include planetary boundaries beyond climate change. Future steps could be, first, to develop a reporting standard within a formal Delphi process of all relevant stakeholders. Second, the catalogue can be used to develop standards of analytic choices for specific decision makers or problems.

Indexed as

Climate ChangeCost-Benefit AnalysisEconomics, MedicalClimateHumansCHEERSClimate footprintClimate impactsExternal costsHealth economic evaluationLife cycle assessment

Identifiers

PMID41499081
PMCPMC13451359

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.