ReviewThe journal of climate change and health
Learning from practice - A rapid review of climate resilient and low carbon health systems - Case studies in six western pacific countries.
Review in The journal of climate change and health. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: As climate change impacts intensify, health systems have the double responsibility of building resilience while reducing their carbon footprint. This rapid review assessed case studies of interventions implemented towards climate resilient and low carbon health systems in six Western-Pacific countries (Australia, Fiji, South Korea, Laos, Mongolia, and Viet Nam). Methods: We conducted a rapid review of academic and grey literature. Framework analysis was applied to map case study interventions against the World Health Organization's Operational Framework for Climate Resilient (CR) and Low Carbon (LC) Health Systems. Results: We identified 43 case studies from a yield of 605 documents. The majority of interventions were classified as LC ( Conclusion: This review highlights a significant gap in published evidence on the practical application of the WHO Operational Framework for Climate-Resilient and Low-Carbon (CR and LC) Health Systems, underscoring the urgent need for further research, documentation, and dissemination of real-world implementation experiences. While we identified numerous co-benefits and emerging considerations for community engagement, the scarcity of cost-benefit analyses limits the ability to determine the most cost-effective investments. A rapid transition from fragmented mitigation efforts to comprehensive, system-wide strategies for resilience and decarbonization is essential to drive transformative change in the health sector.
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.