SynthesisBMJ global health2026
Systematic review and meta-analysis of interventions for mental health in extreme weather events.
Synthesis in BMJ global health, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionClimate change leading to extreme weather events (EWEs) poses critical threat to human health, including mental well-being. As the effects of climate change are becoming more pronounced, there is a need to identify effective interventions to mitigate the mental health impacts.
methodsThe aim of this review was to synthesise the existing literature on interventions to prevent and manage mental health symptoms in people affected by EWEs. We conducted a comprehensive literature search in MEDLINE, EBSCO CINAHL and Cochrane till 7 February 2024 and in Web of Science and EMBASE till 20 February 2024. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-experimental studies and before-after study designs were included. Our search yielded 11 083 potentially relevant papers, which were screened by titles and full texts and 33 studies were finally included in the review. We recorded the study, participants, intervention, disaster and other relevant data on Excel in duplicate. We conducted a meta-analysis separately for intervention-control and before-after studies using Review Manager 5.4. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool II was used to assess risk of bias in RCTs and the risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions tool for quasi-experimental and before-after designs. Main outcomes were symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression, anxiety, stress, general functioning and well-being.
resultsThere was significant improvement in mental health symptoms following implementation of various interventions, leading to a decrease in PTSD symptoms (standardised mean difference (SMD) -2.92, 95% CI (-4.53 to -1.31), six intervention-control studies and SMD -0.71, 95% CI (-0.95 to -0.48), five before-after studies), depression symptoms (SMD -0.28, 95% CI (-0.53 to -0.03), three intervention-control studies and SMD -1.00, 95% CI (-1.41 to -0.59), 11 before-after studies), anxiety symptoms (SMD -0.38, 95% CI (-0.69 to -0.06), two studies and SMD -0.35, 95% CI (-0.47 to -0.23), eight before-after studies), stress symptoms (SMD -0.82, 95% CI (-1.10 to -0.53), two before-after studies), general functioning impairment (SMD -1.22, 95% CI (-1.73 to -0.70), three before-after studies) and an improvement in well-being (SMD 0.29, 95% CI (0.15 to 0.42), three intervention-control studies and SMD 0.67, 95% CI (0.25 to 1.09), two before-after studies).
conclusionThere are existing interventions to improve mental health after an EWE, and these should be integrated into all relevant disaster management plans.
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.