ReviewThe journal of climate change and health
Understanding health literacy within the nexus of environmental, planetary, and one health: Mapping the evidence via bibliometric content analysis.
Review 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Amidst an anthropogenic climate and ecological crisis, the conventional understanding of Health Literacy has been expanded to address socio-ecological determinants of health through the Planetary Health Literacy, Climate and Health Literacy, or One Health Literacy concepts. However, the field's interdisciplinary character and its recent evolutionary status have led to theoretical fragmentation and a lack of conceptual debate. Methodology: To test three expectations regarding the conceptual underpinnings of literacy and competency concepts and to systematically map the evidence, a bibliometric content analysis is conducted using co-occurrence analysis (COA). Findings: A total of 135 peer-reviewed studies meeting the inclusion criteria are analyzed from 1444 screened publications. COA via bibliometric network viewer VOSviewer yields the formation of four distinct clusters: 1) Competencies in Planetary Health Education and sustainable healthcare; 2) Environmental Health Literacy and environmental risk and exposure awareness; 3) Competencies regarding One Health, the animal-human-health nexus and interdisciplinary education; 4) Food Literacy, nutrition, and sustainability. Analyzing patterns of single items underscored One Health and Planetary Health as broadly integrative themes, whereas other concepts remained cluster-specific. The hypothesized distinction between One Health and Planetary Health Literacy is omitted, whereas conceptual differences between Environmental Health Literacy and Planetary Health Literacy are confirmed. Conclusion: The findings contribute to theoretical and methodological research trajectories and reveal the widespread use of vague terms such as
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.