Transparent scientific evidence is key to developing climate-conscious strategies for inhalers: a letter to the editor in response to “carbon dioxide equivalent emissions and cost impact of non-clinically driven inhaler initiation or switch for COPD”

Christian Grah, Stephan Walterspacher, Guido Schmiemann

Open source

DOI
10.1080/03007995.2026.2734640
Published
2026-09-26
Container
Current Medical Research and Opinion
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Open access
unknown

Credibility signals

uncertain Score 64/100 under policy 1.0.0. This is a metadata assessment, not a judgment of the paper's conclusions.

Show all credibility signals

Cite this work

BibTeX

@article{allodium:10.1080/03007995.2026.2734640,
  title = {Transparent scientific evidence is key to developing climate-conscious strategies for inhalers: a letter to the editor in response to “carbon dioxide equivalent emissions and cost impact of non-clinically driven inhaler initiation or switch for COPD”},
  author = {Christian Grah and Stephan Walterspacher and Guido Schmiemann},
  year = {2026},
  journal = {Current Medical Research and Opinion},
  doi = {10.1080/03007995.2026.2734640},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1080/03007995.2026.2734640}
}

RIS

TY  - JOUR
TI  - Transparent scientific evidence is key to developing climate-conscious strategies for inhalers: a letter to the editor in response to “carbon dioxide equivalent emissions and cost impact of non-clinically driven inhaler initiation or switch for COPD”
AU  - Christian Grah
AU  - Stephan Walterspacher
AU  - Guido Schmiemann
PY  - 2026
JO  - Current Medical Research and Opinion
DO  - 10.1080/03007995.2026.2734640
UR  - https://doi.org/10.1080/03007995.2026.2734640
ER  - 

APA

Grah, C., Walterspacher, S., & Schmiemann, G. (2026). Transparent scientific evidence is key to developing climate-conscious strategies for inhalers: a letter to the editor in response to “carbon dioxide equivalent emissions and cost impact of non-clinically driven inhaler initiation or switch for COPD”. Current Medical Research and Opinion. https://doi.org/10.1080/03007995.2026.2734640

Source records