Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33948479›Full record

ArticleSSM - population health2021

Perceived urban green and residents' health in Beijing.

Jingxue Xu, Fahui Wang, Li Chen, Wenzhong Zhang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in SSM - population health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Investigation of Epistemic Equity in Urban Green Space and Mental Health Research: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

4 authors.

Jingxue XuKey Laboratory of Region Sustainable Development Modeling, CAS, Beijing, 100101, China.
Fahui WangDepartment of Geography & Anthropology, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, 70803, USA.
Li ChenCollege of Arts and Sciences, Beijing Union University, Beijing, 100191, China.
Wenzhong ZhangKey Laboratory of Region Sustainable Development Modeling, CAS, Beijing, 100101, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Green space serves urban residents in various functions including promoting health, but the roles of different types of green space are unclear. A survey titled "Healthy Neighborhood" was conducted in Beijing from May to July 2019 to examine and compare the associations between three types of perceived green space (park green, public-square green and utility green) and three aspects of residents' health (physical health, mental health and social health). Results from the multilevel modeling (MLM) analysis show that the perceived park green has a positive correlation with mental health, and all three types of perceived green space correlate with social health positively. No significant correlation of any type of green space is detected on participants' physical health, nor any relation of public-square green or utility green to their mental health. Overall the role of urban green space is stronger on social health than physical and mental health. The findings support the complementary roles of different types of green space, and suggest that expansion in utility greens could be as effective as investing in more costly park and public-square greens, especially in their benefit in promoting social health.

Indexed as

BeijingHealthPark greenPerceived urban greenPublic-square greenUtility green

Identifiers

PMID33948479
PMCPMC8080077

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.