ArticleFrontiers in public health2026
Climate change, pharmaceuticals and prescribing patterns: a scoping review and proposal for the MAMS model for healthcare educators.
Article in Frontiers in public 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Healthcare contributes substantially to climate change, and pharmaceuticals account for a meaningful share of this footprint across manufacturing, distribution, prescribing, and disposal. However, climate-health education and prescribing practices are often addressed separately, leaving limited guidance for integrating climate change, pharmaceuticals, and prescribing patterns within a single framework. This scoping review synthesizes evidence on the intersection of these domains, with attention to how these concepts are incorporated into health professions education (HPE) and clinical practice. Methods: A comprehensive literature search strategy of six databases (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, ERIC, Health Source: Nursing Academic, and Web of Science) identified peer-reviewed studies published between January 1988 and December 2025 in English or Spanish. Eligible studies addressed climate change in relation to pharmaceutical use or prescribing patterns and included an educational or practice-based component; animal studies, studies without interventions, and non-prescribing studies were excluded. Searches were conducted in December 2023 and updated in April 2025. Data were extracted on study characteristics, clinical domain, educational approach, and directional relationships mapped to the MAMS model dyads (Climate ↔ pharmaceuticals; pharmaceuticals ↔ prescribing patterns; climate ↔ prescribing patterns). Results: From 4,247 citations, 28 studies met inclusion criteria. Studies were conducted across multiple regions, most commonly the United States ( Conclusion: Existing literature on climate-conscious prescribing education is expanding but remains clinically concentrated and largely conceptual, with limited evaluation of instructional strategies. No study operationalized a fully bidirectional, tri-dyadic approach linking climate change, pharmaceuticals, and prescribing patterns, underscoring the need for integrated, outcomes-oriented frameworks to guide HPE and practice change.
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.