Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34720329›Full record

ArticleWetlands (Wilmington, N.C.)2021

The Influence of Covid-19 on Perceived Health Effects of Wetland Parks in China.

Xuezhu Zhai, Eckart Lange

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Wetlands (Wilmington, N.C.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors.

Xuezhu ZhaiDepartment of Landscape Architecture, University of Sheffield, Western Bank, Sheffield, S10 2TN UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0945-2284
Eckart LangeDepartment of Landscape Architecture, University of Sheffield, Western Bank, Sheffield, S10 2TN UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Wetland parks are designed to support urban ecological protection, flood control and human well-being. Existing research mainly focuses on their influence on ecology and economy. However, their influence on human well-being and health is rarely studied. In China, during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic (Peak), people were very concerned about health, while at the same time wetland parks which are generally considered beneficial to health were closed. Thus, this study explores the public's perception of the health effects of visiting wetland parks and the impact of the pandemic on the perception. From March 5th to 8th, 2020, before the Peak in China was over, 1,400 respondents participated in a nationwide online survey. It was found that the perceived benefits from visiting wetland parks were higher in terms of mental health than in physical health. Also, the perceived health benefits of wetland parks after the Peak were slightly higher than before the pandemic. The results highlight that wildlife habitat services were considered to be the most important ecosystem services that promote the perceived health benefits. Interestingly, the perceived health benefits of wetland parks by health experts appear to be lower than in other groups, indicating that the health benefits of visiting wetland parks may be overestimated by lay-people or underestimated by health experts. The results provide empirical evidence for managing ecosystem services as delivered by these urban wetlands, in the context of COVID-19 or potential future pandemics, for promoting public health.

Indexed as

COVID-19Ecosystem servicesHealthPerceptionWetland park

Identifiers

PMID34720329
PMCPMC8542502

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.