Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29165173›Full record

SynthesisEnvironmental health and preventive medicine2017

Health and well-being benefits of spending time in forests: systematic review.

Byeongsang Oh, Kyung Ju Lee, Chris Zaslawski, Albert Yeung, David Rosenthal, Linda Larkey, Michael Back

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Environmental health and preventive medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 82 papers, 15 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
82citing papers in PubMed, 15 pooled it
8.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

82 citing papers in PubMed, 15 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 237 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Effects of Forest-Based Interventions on Mental Health: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Pooled it
  7. What Activities in Forests Are Beneficial for Human Health? A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Pooled it
  8. Effect of Forest Therapy on Depression and Anxiety: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Pooled it
  9. The Effects of Forest Therapy on Immune Function.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Nature Exposure and Its Effects on Immune System Functioning: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Pooled it
  12. How Should Forests Be Characterized in Regard to Human Health? Evidence from Existing Literature.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

22 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Byeongsang OhNorthern Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney Medical School, Sydney, NSW, Australia. byeong.oh@sydney.edu.au.
Kyung Ju LeeDepartment of Epidemiology and Medical Informatics, Graduate School of Public Health, Korea University, Seoul, South Korea.
Chris ZaslawskiSchool of Life Science, University of Technology, NSW, Australia.
Albert YeungHarvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
David RosenthalHarvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Linda LarkeyCollege of Nursing & Health Innovation, Arizona State University, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Michael BackNorthern Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney Medical School, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Harvard University · USRoyal North Shore Hospital · AUArizona State University · USKorea University · KRUniversity of Technology Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNumerous studies have reported that spending time in nature is associated with the improvement of various health outcomes and well-being. This review evaluated the physical and psychological benefits of a specific type of exposure to nature, forest therapy.

methodA literature search was carried out using MEDLINE, PubMed, ScienceDirect, EMBASE, and ProQuest databases and manual searches from inception up to December 2016. Key words: "Forest" or "Shinrin -Yoku" or "Forest bath" AND "Health" or "Wellbeing". The methodological quality of each randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was assessed according to the Cochrane risk of bias (ROB) tool.

resultsSix RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Participants' ages ranged from 20 to 79 years. Sample size ranged from 18 to 99. Populations studied varied from young healthy university students to elderly people with chronic disease. Studies reported the positive impact of forest therapy on hypertension (n = 2), cardiac and pulmonary function (n = 1), immune function (n = 2), inflammation (n = 3), oxidative stress (n = 1), stress (n = 1), stress hormone (n = 1), anxiety (n = 1), depression (n = 2), and emotional response (n = 3). The quality of all studies included in this review had a high ROB.

conclusionForest therapy may play an important role in health promotion and disease prevention. However, the lack of high-quality studies limits the strength of results, rendering the evidence insufficient to establish clinical practice guidelines for its use. More robust RCTs are warranted.

Indexed as

ForestsQuality of LifeHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicStress, PsychologicalForestGreen environmentHealthNatureWellbeing

Identifiers

PMID29165173
PMCPMC5664422
OpenAlexW2765553537

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.