ArticleFundamental & clinical pharmacology2026
Evaluating the Environmental Impact of Clinical Research: A Full Life Cycle Analysis of a French Academic Randomised Clinical Trial.
Article in Fundamental & clinical pharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02650609 (Treatment of Chronic Subdural Hematoma by Corticosteroids), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Treatment of Chronic Subdural Hematoma by Corticosteroids
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Measuring the carbon footprint of clinical research activities: a scoping review of measurement tools and methods.BMJ open · 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Climate change poses the greatest threat to human health in the 21st century. The healthcare sector contributes approximately 5% of global greenhouse gas emissions and has a significant environmental impact. Although clinical trials are crucial for identifying effective and safe treatments and preventing disease, their environmental impact is poorly documented. Our study aimed to assess the environmental impact of a publicly funded, academic clinical trial by adapting life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology to clinical research. We performed a retrospective, simplified, full LCA using the EF 3.0 methodology on a prospective, double-blind, randomised controlled neurosurgery trial. The trial included 202 patients at 18 university hospitals throughout France. To identify hotspots of interest, 16 impact indicators and their combination into a single score were evaluated. The results showed that climate change (or greenhouse gas emissions) was the most important indicator, accounting for almost 30% of the single score. Greenhouse gas emissions were estimated at 31.6 t of carbon dioxide equivalent. The next most important were resource use of fossils (24%), resource use of minerals and metals (12%), and particulate matter emissions (8%). The main hotspots identified were patient transport and travel by clinical research assistants for source data verification. In conclusion, by using a full LCA approach, our study confirms that conducting a clinical trial has a substantial environmental impact, particularly with regard to greenhouse gas emissions. The main hotspots identified were related to patient transport and clinical research assistants' travel. Trial Registration: The SUCRE study (Treatment of Chronic Subdural Hematoma by Corticosteroids: A Prospective Randomised Study)-clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02650609.
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.