Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30939833›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2019

Do Protected Areas Contribute to Health and Well-Being? A Cross-Cultural Comparison.

Alexandra Jiricka-Pürrer, Valeria Tadini, Boris Salak, Karolina Taczanowska, Andrzej Tucki, Giulio Senes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Landscape Perception and the Importance of Recreation Areas for Students during the Pandemic Time.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  8. Effectiveness of China's Protected Areas in Mitigating Human Activity Pressure.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  9. Review
  10. 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

6 authors.

Alexandra Jiricka-PürrerInstitute of Landscape Development, Recreation and Conservation Planning, BOKU Vienna, Peter-Jordan-Straße 65, 1180 Vienna, Austria. alexandra.jiricka@boku.ac.at.ORCID 0000-0002-6842-1835
Valeria TadiniDepartment of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, University of Milan, Via Celoria 2, 20133 Milano, Italy. vale1990@gmail.com.
Boris SalakWSL-Eidg. Forschungsanstalt, Zürcherstrasse 111, 8903 Birmensdorf, Switzerland. boris.salak@wsl.ch.
Karolina TaczanowskaInstitute of Landscape Development, Recreation and Conservation Planning, BOKU Vienna, Peter-Jordan-Straße 65, 1180 Vienna, Austria. karolina.taczanowska@boku.ac.at.ORCID 0000-0001-9447-7528
Andrzej TuckiMaria Curie-Sklodowska University in Lublin, Plac Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej 5, 20-031 Lublin, Poland. andrzej.tucki@poczta.umcs.lublin.pl.
Giulio SenesDepartment of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, University of Milan, Via Celoria 2, 20133 Milano, Italy. giulio.senes@unimi.it.ORCID 0000-0003-4549-2347

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Due to their valuable landscape and natural characteristics, protected areas (PAs) distinguish themselves from other green spaces. Studies that survey individuals on the perceived capacity of PAs to provide health benefits are very limited. However, the importance of PAs for societal health could emphasize the necessity to preserve them. In addition, studies of cross-country comparisons of nature-based activities show strong cultural differences with regard to the importance of wild nature and landscape preferences. Cross-country comparisons of the perception of PAs as a resource for personal well-being and health are lacking. An extensive survey with face-to-face questionnaires was conducted in PAs in Poland, Austria, and Italy with an overall sample size of 1390 people. It examined both emotional and physical personal well-being in the context of a stay in a PA. In general, the results showed that between the three countries, different perceptions of the capacity of PAs to contribute to personal health and well-being exist. Both diverse emotional and physical benefits were associated with a stay in a PA. Moreover, respondents from the three countries assessed the perceived capacity of a PA to reduce negative physical symptoms, such as muscular pain or tension, and negative emotional symptoms, such as depression or stress.

Indexed as

Conservation of Natural ResourcesParks, RecreationalPopulation HealthAdultAgedAustriaCross-Cultural ComparisonFemaleHumansItalyMaleMiddle AgedPerceptionPolandYoung Adultcross-culturalecosystem servicesemotional healthhealth and well-beingphysical healthprotected areas (PAs)

Identifiers

PMID30939833
PMCPMC6479725

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.