ArticleThe journal of climate change and health
Stakeholder collaboration in digital climate-health platforms: Mapping patterns across international case studies.
Article in The journal of climate change and health. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Digital climate-health platforms are web, mobile or dashboard-based architectures that link climate, environmental, health and socio-economic data to make climate-related health risks visible and actionable. This study maps stakeholder collaboration patterns in international platforms, focusing on who contributes, how collaboration is organized, and how platform-specific features shape inclusion, decision-making and use across varied institutional contexts. Methods: We employed a sequential mixed-method design combining internet-based scoping, survey responses and 22 semi-structured interviews across 20 projects. Survey data were analyzed descriptively, and interview material was coded inductively to construct ideal-type collaboration patterns. Findings were triangulated with project documents and platform information to identify stakeholder roles, collaboration mechanisms and case-level pattern assignments. Results: Digital climate-health platforms involved developers, governments, international agencies, researchers, industry partners, community organizations and end-users. Five ideal-types were identified: central coordination, hierarchical distribution, network-based distribution, iterative co-evolution, and co-leadership. These patterns were not mutually exclusive; each case was assigned to a dominant pattern while secondary features were recorded. Collaboration was shaped by authority over data access, indicators, models, interfaces, feedback interpretation, implementation and post-launch maintenance. Conclusion: The findings show that collaboration in digital climate-health platforms is both a platform design and a governance issue. Centralized and hierarchical arrangements provide accountability, continuity and authoritative communication but limit end-user influence. Network-based, iterative, and co-leadership arrangements can widen participation and responsiveness, yet they do not automatically constitute co-production. The findings point to the importance of clarifying decision rights, embedding co-design, and evaluating who can influence data, models, interfaces and use.
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.