Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41999149›Full record

ArticleFundamental & clinical pharmacology2026

Evaluating the Environmental Impact of Clinical Research: A Full Life Cycle Analysis of a French Academic Randomised Clinical Trial.

Claire Fougerou-Leurent, Louise Forteau, Maëlle Perrot-Loyer, Alain Renault, Margot Brion, Catherine Mouchel, Chloé Rousseau, Enora Marion, Sabrina Cochennec, Anne Ganivet and 3 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT02650609 phase3completednot on this map

Treatment of Chronic Subdural Hematoma by Corticosteroids

TypeinterventionalSponsorRennes University HospitalRan2016 to 2020Enrolled202ConditionsChronic Subdural HematomasArmsMethylprednisolone, Placebo
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Claire Fougerou-LeurentDepartment of Pharmacology, Rennes University Hospital, Rennes, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2736-6769
Louise ForteauEnvironmental Consulting Firm O2M Lab, Rennes, France.
Maëlle Perrot-LoyerEnvironmental Consulting Firm O2M Lab, Rennes, France.
Alain RenaultDepartment of Pharmacology, Rennes University Hospital, Rennes, France.
Margot BrionClinical Investigation Center Inserm 1414, Rennes, France.
Catherine MouchelDepartment of Pharmacology, Rennes University Hospital, Rennes, France.
Chloé RousseauDepartment of Pharmacology, Rennes University Hospital, Rennes, France.
Enora MarionDepartment of Clinical Research, Rennes University Hospital, Rennes, France.
Sabrina CochennecDepartment of Pharmacology, Rennes University Hospital, Rennes, France.
Anne GanivetDepartment of Clinical Research, Rennes University Hospital, Rennes, France.
Marie-Laure GervaisDepartment of Clinical Research, Rennes University Hospital, Rennes, France.
Loïc FinDepartment of Clinical Research, Rennes University Hospital, Rennes, France.
Bruno LaviolleDepartment of Pharmacology, Rennes University Hospital, Rennes, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Biomedical ResearchClimate ChangeEnvironmentDouble-Blind MethodFranceGreenhouse GasesHumansProspective StudiesRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRetrospective StudiesGreenhouse Gasescarbon footprintclinical researcheco‐designlife cycle analysis

Identifiers

PMID41999149
PMCPMC13090804

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.