Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27015672›Full record

SynthesisBMC public health2016

A systematic review of the health and well-being impacts of school gardening: synthesis of quantitative and qualitative evidence.

Heather Ohly, Sarah Gentry, Rachel Wigglesworth, Alison Bethel, Rebecca Lovell, Ruth Garside

Erratum issuedAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC public health, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 58 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
58citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

58 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Garden-based interventions and early childhood health: an umbrella review.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2020
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Enhancing Food Literacy and Food Security through School Gardening in Rural and Regional Communities.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  19. Students' consumption of high and low nutrition foods and reduced plate waste by schools' wellness-related policies and garden program participation.Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2023
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Heather OhlyEuropean Centre for Environment and Human Health, University of Exeter Medical School, Truro, Cornwall, UK.
Sarah GentryNorfolk and Norwich University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Norwich, Norfolk, UK.
Rachel WigglesworthEuropean Centre for Environment and Human Health, University of Exeter Medical School, Truro, Cornwall, UK.
Alison BethelNIHR CLAHRC South West Peninsula (PenCLAHRC), University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, Devon, UK.
Rebecca LovellEuropean Centre for Environment and Human Health, University of Exeter Medical School, Truro, Cornwall, UK.
Ruth GarsideEuropean Centre for Environment and Human Health, University of Exeter Medical School, Truro, Cornwall, UK. R.Garside@exeter.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSchool gardening programmes are increasingly popular, with suggested benefits including healthier eating and increased physical activity. Our objectives were to understand the health and well-being impacts of school gardens and the factors that help or hinder their success.

methodsWe conducted a systematic review of quantitative and qualitative evidence (PROSPERO CRD42014007181). We searched multiple databases and used a range of supplementary approaches. Studies about school gardens were included if they reported on physical or mental health or well-being. Quantitative studies had to include a comparison group. Studies were quality appraised using appropriate tools. Findings were narratively synthesised and the qualitative evidence used to produce a conceptual framework to illustrate how benefits might be accrued.

resultsEvidence from 40 articles (21 quantitative studies; 16 qualitative studies; 3 mixed methods studies) was included. Generally the quantitative research was poor. Evidence for changes in fruit and vegetable intake was limited and based on self-report. The qualitative research was better quality and ascribed a range of health and well-being impacts to school gardens, with some idealistic expectations for their impact in the long term. Groups of pupils who do not excel in classroom activities were thought to particularly benefit. Lack of funding and over reliance on volunteers were thought to threaten success, while involvement with local communities and integration of gardening activities into the school curriculum were thought to support success.

conclusionMore robust quantitative research is needed to convincingly support the qualitative evidence suggesting wide ranging benefits from school gardens.

Indexed as

Health StatusMental HealthAchievementGardeningHumansQualitative ResearchSchoolsVolunteersGardensHealthMixed methodsSchoolSystematic reviewWell-being

Identifiers

PMID27015672
PMCPMC4807565

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.