Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30746588›Full record

SynthesisQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2019

The effect of nature exposure on the mental health of patients: a systematic review.

C H Trøstrup, A B Christiansen, K S Stølen, P K Nielsen, R Stelter

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

C H TrøstrupDepartment of Nutrition, Exercise and Sports, Faculty of Science, University of Copenhagen, Nørre Allé 51, Kbh N, Copenhagen, Denmark. ct3@kp.dk.
A B ChristiansenDepartment of Management, Organisation and Administration. R&D Health., University College Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
K S StølenDepartment of Management, Organisation and Administration. R&D Health., University College Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
P K NielsenDepartment of Management, Organisation and Administration. R&D Health., University College Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
R StelterDepartment of Nutrition, Exercise and Sports, Faculty of Science, University of Copenhagen, Nørre Allé 51, Kbh N, Copenhagen, Denmark.
University College Copenhagen · DKUniversity of Copenhagen · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe effect of nature-based interventions on self-reported mental well-being in patients with physical disease is gaining increasing attention. However, there is a lack of randomized controlled trials investigating this area. Due to the massive costs in health care systems, there is a need for new strategies to address these issues and an urgent need for attention to this field. Nature-based interventions are low cost, easy to implement, and should get attention within the health care field. Therefore, the objective was to find the impact of nature interventions on mental well-being in humans with a physical disease.

methodsIn four major databases (PubMed, Cinahl, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library), a systematic review of quantitative studies of nature's impact on self-reported mental health in patients with physical disease was performed. A total of 1909 articles were retrieved but only five met the inclusion criteria and were summarized.

resultsAll five studies were quantitative, with a control group and a nature-based intervention. A source of heterogeneity was identified: the patients in one of the five studies were psychosomatic. In the four studies with somatic patients, significant benefit of nature on self-reported mental health outcomes was found; the only study that failed to show a significant benefit was the one with psychosomatic patients.

conclusionA significant effect of nature on mental well-being of patients with somatic disease was found. The result in patients with psychosomatic disease is inconclusive, and more studies in this category are needed. Further research on the effect of nature on mental health is merited, with special attention to standardizing intervention type and dose as well as outcome measures within each medical discipline.

Indexed as

NatureAdultHumansMental HealthPsychophysiologic DisordersQuality of LifeMental well-beingNatureNature-based interventionsPatientsSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID30746588
OpenAlexW2911947412

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.