ArticleBioethics2026
The Agents of Climate Justice in Healthcare.
Article in Bioethics, 2026. 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.
- The Agents of Climate Justice in Healthcare.Bioethics · 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
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
This paper addresses the critical issue of decarbonising healthcare systems to help combat climate change. I focus on identifying the 'agents of justice' responsible for this transformation. Beginning with the claim that healthcare's greenhouse gas emissions cause injustice, the paper assumes that achieving a net zero healthcare system is essential for climate justice. The discussion centres on two prevailing perspectives: one that primarily assigns responsibility to healthcare organisations and another that holds individual healthcare professionals accountable. The paper advocates for a pluralistic approach to responsibility, contending that the complexity and scale of reducing healthcare emissions necessitate allocating responsibilities based on effectiveness. This leads to the identification of two types of responsibility: first-order responsibilities, which involve direct actions to reduce emissions, and second-order responsibilities, which involve supporting and ensuring the fulfilment of first-order duties. The paper clarifies how mitigation responsibilities should be allocated across organisations and individuals by expanding the scope of responsibility to include a broader range of agents, both within and beyond the healthcare sector. By distinguishing between first-order and second-order responsibilities, the paper offers a clearer framework for understanding the distribution of obligations in achieving climate justice in healthcare. Ultimately, it underscores that focusing solely on direct mitigation efforts by organisations or clinicians is inadequate, and a more comprehensive, multi-agent approach is required to effectively decarbonise healthcare systems.
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.