ArticleBulletin of the World Health Organization2026
Research ethics committees and regulation of climate change and health research.
Article in Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- From the biomedical model to the climate-sensitive model: A necessary adjustment for research ethics committees.Dialogues in health · 2026Article
- An ethical basis for research into health and climate change.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Research has become essential in addressing the effects of climate change on human health and that of the biosphere. However, the ethical regulation of such research remains insufficiently developed, particularly with the current consolidation of research ethics committees as the reference standard to review and approve of health research. Unlike human-centred health research, climate and health research extends beyond humans to include biotic and abiotic components. This aspect challenges the human-centred approach to ethics that has traditionally defined the role of research ethics committees. In this analysis, we seek to re-examine the role of these committees in guaranteeing the ethical review of climate change and health research and the possibility of extending beyond its limited, human-centred scope. We also discuss the ethical concerns and considerations from the global and African-centred perspective that research ethics committees should address. We recommend that institutions hosting these committees implement two initiatives. First, restructure research ethics committees to include experts in climate change and health, as well as activists and representatives of Indigenous communities who are knowledgeable about the links between health and climate. Second, support initiatives to build the capacity of committee members, for example by developing training curricula on climate change and health research. These curricula should aim to strengthen the ability of committees to identify and address key issues including justice, intergenerational ethics and community-specific norms and values.
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.