The survey was informed by climate-health literature, dermatologic environmental impacts, and health communication frameworks (eg, message framing, perceived susceptibility, and severity from the Health Belief Model) [5]. Five UCSF (University of California, San Francisco) dermatologists reviewed the instrument for clinical relevance and clarity. Ten adult AD patients piloted it, and feedback informed wording and usability.

Eligible participants were English-speaking adults with AD seen at UCSF dermatology clinics between August 2023 and August 2024. A total of 2164 patients were identified by the electronic health record (EHR) query. To reduce selection bias, patients were contacted via EHR messaging or mailed letters to account for differences in digital health access; 326 patients expressed interest and became the study population. These patients were sent the study description and a secure Qualtrics link to the online survey.

Descriptive statistics using Microsoft Excel were used to summarize participant demographics and survey responses. Frequencies were calculated for categorical variables. No inferential or hypothesis testing was conducted, as the study aimed to characterize trends and patient-reported experiences rather than test associations or determine causality.

This study received exempt certification from the UCSF medical ethical review committee (IRB 21‐33538). All participants provided consent to participate in the study, and their responses were deidentified.

While this study does not evaluate clinical causality, it provides novel insight into how patients perceive and experience the effects of environmental-climate factors on their AD. Most participants perceived climate-related changes in their AD and desired clinical guidance, yet few reported receiving it. These findings suggest that dermatologists should initiate brief conversations about common triggers, particularly heat and air pollution, and provide anticipatory guidance and resources. This insight underscores previously reported low self-efficacy among dermatologists in discussing climate change with patients [4]. Understanding these patient insights is vital to providing patient-centered care and forming effective partnerships with patients about their skin health. These efforts align with the American Academy of Dermatology’s commitment to “educate our patients about the effects of climate change on the health of their skin.” [6]

Limitations include a single-center design limiting generalizability, reliance on self-reported data with potential recall bias, and possible self-selection bias, as patients more affected by climate change may have been more likely to participate. Future research should validate these findings in broader populations, explore climate-health experiences in other skin conditions, and develop educational and clinical strategies to help navigate these climate-health conversations with patients. Even in short visits, dermatologists can explore patient experiences with climate change using supportive prompts (eg, “Would it be helpful to discuss how environmental factors might relate to your flares?”) to validate patient concerns and provide opportunities for personalized climate-health conversations to be continued in subsequent visits.

This study highlights a disconnect between how patients with AD experience climate-related triggers and how often these concerns are addressed in clinical care. Findings underscore the need for tools and strategies to support climate-health conversations in dermatology. Integrating environmental health into AD management can enhance patient-centered care, improve outcomes, and reinforce dermatology’s role at the intersection of clinical care, public health, and patient advocacy.