THE HEAT MAP

Heat gets the headlines. Across 58 studies, cold is the deadlier extreme.

A meta-analysis spanning two decades of research found extreme cold carried a higher relative risk of death than extreme heat or heatwaves — even as warming shifts public attention toward summer temperatures.

Pooled relative risk of all-cause mortality by temperature extremeExtreme cold: 1.48; Heatwaves: 1.28; Extreme heat: 1.15012Extreme cold1.48Heatwaves1.28Extreme heat1.15
Pooled relative risk of all-cause mortality by temperature extreme
GroupValue (value)
Extreme cold1.48 (1.22 to 1.79)
Heatwaves1.28 (1.16 to 1.42)
Extreme heat1.15 (1.1 to 1.19)
Pooled relative risk of all-cause mortality by temperature extreme 58 observational studies published 2000 to 2024; whiskers are 95% confidence intervals. Source: International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health

Public attention to temperature and health has increasingly centered on summer heatwaves, but a meta-analysis published this month in the International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health finds that, measured by relative mortality risk, extreme cold remains the more hazardous of the two extremes [s1].

What the analysis covered

Researchers searched the literature published between 2000 and 2024 for observational studies quantifying how extreme temperature events affect urgent care outcomes — hospitalization, emergency department visits, length of hospital stay, and medical costs [s1]. From an initial pool of 3,411 screened papers, 58 studies met the review's inclusion criteria and were pooled in a meta-analysis [s1].

The core numbers

The pooled relative risk for all-cause mortality was 1.478 (95% CI: 1.219–1.792) for extreme cold, compared with 1.145 (95% CI: 1.103–1.189) for extreme heat and 1.280 (95% CI: 1.155–1.418) for heatwaves specifically [s1]. In plain terms: across the pooled studies, a period of extreme cold was associated with roughly a 48% increase in the relative risk of death, versus about 15% for extreme heat generally and 28% for heatwave conditions specifically [s1].

Heat's signature showed up more clearly in downstream health-system use rather than in the mortality figures. The pooled relative risk for hospitalization during heatwaves was 1.060 (95% CI: 1.018–1.104), and for emergency department visits during heatwaves it was 1.047 (95% CI: 1.022–1.072) [s1]. The review found a limited but notable set of studies showing that both extreme cold and extreme heat increased the risk of hospital stays longer than 24 hours, and estimated that the associated economic losses could reach €25.5 billion [s1].

Why cold outranks heat in this data

The review's authors conclude plainly that extreme cold is the most hazardous temperature event studied, with mortality the most sensitive indicator of that hazard [s1]. That finding runs against the more heat-focused framing common in recent climate-health coverage, though it is consistent with a body of prior epidemiological research showing that cold-related mortality — driven substantially by cardiovascular strain, respiratory illness, and indirect causes like falls and carbon monoxide poisoning from heating — has historically outpaced heat-related mortality in absolute terms across many temperate and cold-climate countries.

What this doesn't settle

A pooled relative risk across 58 heterogeneous studies collapses a lot of local variation — climate, housing quality, healthcare access, and population age structure all shape how dangerous a given cold snap or heatwave actually is in a specific place, and the review's aggregate numbers don't capture that variation. The review's authors also note that fewer studies examined length-of-stay outcomes using measures beyond extreme heat, meaning the cold-specific picture on that particular outcome is less complete than the mortality data [s1]. And a lower relative risk for heat does not mean heat is a smaller problem in absolute terms — heatwave-associated increases in emergency department and hospital use, even at a smaller relative risk than cold-related mortality, translate into large numbers of additional cases as extreme heat events become more frequent. The review's contribution is not to declare heat a non-issue, but to put a number on a comparison that public discussion often treats as settled in heat's direction by assumption rather than data [s1].

Sources

Sources

  1. A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the health burden of extreme heat and cold on mortality and urgent care utilizationInternational Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health , April 7, 2026

More on

Related coverage