SynthesisJournal of health, population, and nutrition2026
Climate, conflict, and food security: a systematic review of household-level evidence (2020-2025).
Synthesis in Journal of health, population, and nutrition, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Climate and conflict crises increasingly occur together, creating compounded risks for household food security. This review synthesizes evidence from 37 quantitative studies published 2020-2025 on how climate crises (such as drought, storms, or floods), violent conflict (such as war and institutional fragility), and their interactions affect household food security. Most studies examine either climate crises (51%) or conflict crises (38%), while only 11% analyze combined crises. Evidence is geographically concentrated in Sub-Saharan Africa (65%) and relies largely on cross-sectional surveys (68%), limiting insight into longer-term trajectories. Climate crises are measured mainly using meteorological or remote-sensing datasets (42%) while conflict exposure relies predominantly on self-reported data (71%). Only a small number of studies integrate geocoded climate or political violence datasets with household surveys, and few studies estimate interaction or spillover effects. Food security measurement is also narrow, with most studies using access and utilization indicators such as the food consumption score (FCS) (43%), household food insecurity access scale (HFIAS) (35%), or household dietary diversity score (HDDS) (19%). Across studies, climate crises, conflict, and their concurrence are associated with reduced consumption, lower dietary diversity, and greater coping burdens. Impacts vary by household assets, agroecology, and institutional or humanitarian support, highlighting the need for longitudinal and spatially or contextually explicit evidence measuring productive resilience rather than only short-term consumption smoothing.
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.