ArticleSustainability2019
Enhancing Health Through Access to Nature: How Effective are Interventions in Woodlands in Deprived Urban Communities? A Quasi-experimental Study in Scotland, UK.
Article in Sustainability, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Systematic Review of the Impact of Changes to Urban Green Spaces on Health and Education Outcomes, and a Critique of Their Applicability to Inform Economic Evaluation.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- The association between green space, socioeconomic deprivation, and COVID-19 infection: a population-based cross-sectional study.International journal of public health · 2026Article
- Sports in Natural Forests: A Systematic Review of Environmental Impact and Compatibility for Readability.Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Urban park green space use analysis based on trajectory big data: Experience from a medium-sized city in China.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Evaluating the impact on physical inactivity of Together an Active Future, a partnership approach to physical activity promotion. A difference-in-differences study.Journal of epidemiology and community health · 2023Article
- The Contribution of Environmental Science to Mental Health Research: A Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- GroundsWell: Community-engaged and data-informed systems transformation of Urban Green and Blue Space for population health - a new initiative.Wellcome open research · 2022Article
- The Cost Effectiveness of Ecotherapy as a Healthcare Intervention, Separating the Wood from the Trees.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Modelling smallholder farmers' preferences for soil fertility management technologies in Benin: A stated preference approach.PloS one · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
High prevalence of poor mental health is a major public health problem. Natural environments may contribute to mitigating stress and enhancing health. However, there is little evidence on whether community-level interventions intended to increase exposure to natural environments can improve mental health and related behaviours. In the first study of its kind, we evaluated whether the implementation of a programme designed to improve the quality of, and access to, local woodlands in deprived communities in Scotland, UK, was associated with lower perceived stress or other health-related outcomes, using a controlled, repeat cross-sectional design with a nested prospective cohort. Interventions included physical changes to the woodlands and community engagement activities within the woodlands, with data collected at baseline (2013) and post-intervention (2014 and 2015). The interventions were, unexpectedly, associated with increased perceived stress compared to control sites. However, we observed significantly greater increases in stress for those living >500 m from intervention sites. Visits to nearby nature (woods and other green space) increased overall, and moderate physical activity levels also increased. In the intervention communities, those who visited natural environments showed smaller increases in stress than those who did not; there was also some evidence of increased nature connectedness and social cohesion. The intervention costs were modest but there were no significant changes in quality of life on which to base cost-effectiveness. Findings suggest factors not captured in the study may have contributed to the perceived stress patterns found. Wider community engagement and longer post-intervention follow-up may be needed to achieve significant health benefits from woodland interventions such as those described here. The study points to the challenges in evidencing the effectiveness of green space and forestry interventions to enhance health in urban environments, but also to potential benefits from more integrated approaches across health and landscape planning and management practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.