Back

Interventions to negate aggravated diarrheal disease due to climate change - A scoping review protocol

Madriz Montero, A.; Kooiman, F.; Ruiz, F.; Bozzani, F.

2025-06-03 health economics
10.1101/2025.06.03.25328790 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundClimate change is expected to magnify the risk of transmission of diarrhoeal disease, underscoring the need for effective and transformative adaptation. It is urgent to characterize the evidence of interventions that are available and delivered to mitigate the impact of climate change on diarrhoea to support decision making. The SPRINGS initiative has identified health technology assessment (HTA) as a potential approach to priority setting of planetary health interventions. This protocol describes the a priori objectives and methods to identify the adaptation interventions available to mitigate the impact of climate change on diarrhoeal disease and map the gaps between the available evidence and health technology assessment (HTA). MethodsA search of nine bibliographic databases will be conducted by a library information professional with no time restriction to account for health, health economics and environmental science literature. Websites of major climate funds and stakeholders will be searched for grey and other literature. Two reviewers will independently screen titles and abstracts, and full texts based on predefined eligibility criteria. Data extraction will follow established climate change adaptation and HTA frameworks. Descriptive data analysis methods will be used for the synthesis of results through topic mapping, gap analysis and narrative synthesis. Ethics and disseminationEthical approval to conduct the scoping review is not required as the information collected and reviewed is publicly available through database and website searches. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, workshops and conference presentations.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.