Eco‐anxiety in youth: An integrative literature review
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Climate change-related eco-anxiety in young people has made headlines around the world, but most study of this phenomenon has been limited to adults. Eco-anxiety is still not well defined in the literature, but generally refers to distress, worry, or concern related to the climate change crisis. Young people will be chronologically more exposed to climate change-related harms and problems, and this may be causing increased eco-anxiety in this population. This literature review aimed to summarize the relevant works on eco-anxiety in young people, provide a critique of the literature, identify gaps, and discuss the relevance to nursing practice. A literature search using multiple databases and other sources was completed, using applicable key terms and resulted in 23 sources to inform the review. Key themes of eco-anxiety definition variation, hopelessness and burden in young people, and responses to eco-anxiety are discussed, and critical analysis is undertaken. The main conclusions include a broad working definition of eco-anxiety that does not pathologize the eco-anxiety experience but recognizes that it can cause suffering. Also discussed is the role of nurses in reducing the potential or actual suffering of youth through hope promotion, challenging binary thinking patterns, building emotional resilience, encouraging action or involvement in climate change spheres, and promoting climate justice and advocacy. Recommendations for further research are offered.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it