Back

Estimating the health impacts of climate change for policy decision-support: a systematic review of spatial microsimulation methods

Brunn, A. A.; Picetti, R.; Ferguson, L.; Ruiz, F.; Meier, P.; Green, R.; Milner, J.

2025-10-07 public and global health
10.1101/2025.10.03.25337089 medRxiv
Show abstract

Spatial microsimulation models have recently emerged as a new method to quantify health impacts associated with climate change for policy decision-support. These individual-based methods, previously used in tax and health policy planning, have been adapted by combining climate data with exposure-response associations to estimate the distributional health impacts attributable to climate hazards using synthetic populations. To evaluate their methodological characteristics, we conducted a systematic review of the literature. We searched five electronic databases, Google Scholar and the International Journal of Microsimulation, and screened 762 articles to reach a final study set of seven articles. Most models simulated populations based in high income countries (n=5) and applied dynamic methods to forecast future health outcomes (n=5). Multiple diverse climate-health pathways of impact were investigated, ranging from heatwave mortality to air pollution-induced cardiovascular outcomes, to climate-sensitive infectious disease occurrence. Baseline and projected spatial climate data was mapped to individuals in city, state, or regional-level synthetic populations to allocate personal hazard exposure. Most models included socio-economic and demographic attributes (n=6) to integrate vulnerabilities for burden assessments in marginalised groups such as children, women, and the elderly. Climate policies mainly focused on mitigation and simulated future emissions scenarios (n=5), or policy mixes (n=1); one study tested an incremental adaptation intervention. Methods to enhance decision-support among alternative policy options such as economic evaluation (n=2) or stakeholder engagement (n=3) were under-represented. All models acknowledged uncertainty of parameters, and most reported uncertainty analyses (n=5). High data needs may limit accessibility of these methods in some contexts, however options to build on existing models and improve data and computing power access could overcome these challenges. This systematic review documents this evolving, state of the art application of microsimulation and finds a promising and versatile quantitative tool for health impact assessments and climate policy decision-support.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Science of The Total Environment
179 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
14.0%
2
GeoHealth
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.9%
3
Environmental Research
46 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.2%
4
Environmental Science & Technology
64 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
6.2%
5
Environmental Health Perspectives
17 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.2%
6
Environment International
42 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
4.1%
7
PLOS Global Public Health
293 papers in training set
Top 2%
4.1%
50% of probability mass above
8
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 37%
3.9%
9
Environmental Pollution
35 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
3.5%
10
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 39%
3.5%
11
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 27%
3.5%
12
Global Change Biology
69 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
2.5%
13
The Innovation
12 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.4%
14
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.3%
15
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
124 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.0%
16
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 53%
1.6%
17
Scientific Data
174 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.3%
18
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 10%
1.3%
19
Spatial and Spatio-temporal Epidemiology
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.2%
20
JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
45 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.2%
21
eBioMedicine
130 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
22
BMJ Global Health
98 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
23
Environmental Science & Technology Letters
22 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.8%
24
Indoor Air
10 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.8%
25
BMC Public Health
147 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.7%
26
Nature
575 papers in training set
Top 16%
0.7%
27
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 26%
0.7%
28
Data in Brief
13 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.7%
29
Environmental Research Letters
15 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.6%
30
Journal of Environmental Management
11 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.6%