ArticleWomen's health (London, England)
Mapping two decades of research on climate change and women's reproductive health: A bibliometric analysis (2000-2024).
Article in Women's health (London, England). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
backgroundClimate change is increasingly recognized as a determinant of reproductive and maternal health, yet the scope, evolution, and structural dynamics of this research domain remain underexplored. Bibliometric approaches can clarify thematic priorities, geographic imbalances, and knowledge gaps.
objectivesThis study systematically maps the global research landscape on climate change and women's reproductive and maternal health from 2000 to 2024, examining temporal trends, thematic clusters, citation networks, collaboration patterns, and geographic distributions, with a particular focus on epistemic and equity-related imbalances.
designBibliometric analysis of 378 peer-reviewed publications indexed in Scopus and Web of Science, combining performance analysis with science mapping techniques.
methodsDatasets were harmonized and analyzed using Biblioshiny, VOSviewer, and pyBibX. Analyses included co-occurrence mapping, trigram analysis, keyword evolution, bibliographic coupling, and citation and collaboration network analysis. Through co-occurrence mapping and trigram analysis, we identified dominant biomedical framings while revealing marginalized perspectives; through collaboration and citation network analysis, we traced how knowledge production is concentrated in the Global North despite vulnerabilities being greatest in the Global South.
resultsThe field has expanded rapidly since 2020, consolidating around biomedical endpoints such as preterm birth, fertility, and maternal morbidity. Research output and influence are dominated by high-income countries, particularly the United States, United Kingdom, China, and Australia. Female scholars (e.g., Kovats, Bonell, Filippi) are central to collaboration networks, but Southern contributions remain underrepresented and often embedded in asymmetrical North-South partnerships. Journal productivity is led by
conclusionsResearch on climate change and women's health has matured substantially, establishing causal pathways between environmental stressors and adverse reproductive outcomes. However, epistemic inequities persist, with knowledge production concentrated in the Global North and underrepresentation of Global South leadership. Advancing the field requires equity-driven collaborations, interdisciplinary approaches, and the integration of feminist and decolonial perspectives to ensure inclusive and just knowledge production.
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.