ReviewiScience2026
Climate change and sexual and reproductive health: A mixed methods scoping review of possible mechanisms.
Review in iScience, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This scoping review synthesized empirical evidence on the relationships and possible pathways through which climate change could impact sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Eligible sources had to investigate climate change and SRHR using any study design. Two independent reviewers conducted screening; data extraction captured exposures, outcomes, associations/relationships, and possible mediators and contextual moderators. From 40,503 database-identified sources, we included 256 peer-reviewed publications across 108 LMICs. We identified 14 potential pathways and developed a typology of mediators and contextual moderators to inform the mechanisms. Five mediator domains were identified: (1) systems and infrastructure, (2) demographic shifts, (3) socioeconomic resources, and (4) behavioral and (5) biological. Six contextual moderator types were isolated: (1) patriarchal norms, (2) cultural power structures, (3) socioeconomic realities, (4) gender-inequitable climate governance, (5) place-based factors, and (6) pre-existing systems/infrastructure. As climate shocks intensify, advancing a mechanistic understanding will be critical to designing responsive, inclusive, and sustainable systems of protection.
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.