ArticleJournal of advanced nursing2026
Gender Justice in the Triple Planetary Crisis: A Scoping Review.
Article in Journal of advanced nursing, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimTo identify and report how gender justice is conceptualised and discussed in contemporary health literature in relation to the Triple Planetary Crisis of climate change, pollution and biodiversity loss, with a particular focus on the experiences of women and gender-diverse populations, and the representation of nurses and other healthcare professionals dominated by women.
designScoping review. DATA SOURCES: Searches were conducted across MEDLINE (Ovid), Scopus, CINHAL, Embase and ProQuest, focusing on studies published from January 1 2000-23 September 2024. REVIEW
methodsThe review was conducted in accordance with the JBI methodology for scoping reviews and reported against the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. Data were extracted according to a pre-specified extraction framework, developed a priori, encompassing components of gender justice and intersectionality.
resultsA total of 39 studies were included: 17 (43.6%) qualitative, 17 (43.6%) quantitative and 5 (12.8%) mixed methods. The focus of the studies included gendered experiences of climate change (30.8%), decision-making and governance (20.5%), health and wellbeing (17.9%), women's economic participation (15.4%), cultural and spiritual connections to land (7.7%), and intersectionality and human rights (7.7%). Gender-diverse populations, nurses and other healthcare professions dominated by women were not represented in the literature.
conclusionThe literature reported that women experienced differentiated exposure to the Triple Planetary Crisis. The underrepresentation of gender diverse people and nurses in recent studies remains a significant barrier to advancing understanding of gender justice. Integrating gender justice into health systems is increasingly important to prevent women from being disproportionately impacted by the Triple Planetary Crisis. IMPACT: More attention to inclusion of frontline healthcare professionals, including nurses, in governance, policy discussions and leadership roles could strengthen the response to systemic environmental threats. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public involvement.
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.