Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35395304›Full record

ReviewThe Science of the total environment2022

Nature's contributions in coping with a pandemic in the 21st century: A narrative review of evidence during COVID-19.

S M Labib, Matthew H E M Browning, Alessandro Rigolon, Marco Helbich, Peter James

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Science of the total environment, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Green Villages, the Pandemic, and the Future of California Urbanism.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  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.

S M LabibDepartment of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Faculty of Geosciences, Utrecht University, 3584 CB Utrecht, The Netherlands. Electronic address: s.m.labib@uu.nl.
Matthew H E M BrowningDepartment of Parks, Recreation, and Tourism Management, Clemson University, Clemson, SC, 29631, USA.
Alessandro RigolonDepartment of City and Metropolitan Planning, The University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA.
Marco HelbichDepartment of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Faculty of Geosciences, Utrecht University, 3584 CB Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Peter JamesDepartment of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School and Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, 401 Park Drive, Boston, MA 02215, USA; Department of Environmental Health, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, 655 Huntington Avenue, Boston, MA 02115, USA.

Funding

Built Environment Assessment through Computer visiON (BEACON): Applying Deep Learning to Street-Level and Satellite Images to Estimate Built Environment Effects on Cardiovascular HealthR01HL150119 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI JAMES, PETER · 2020 to 2024
$3.9M
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL150119
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While COVID-19 lockdowns have slowed coronavirus transmission, such structural measures also have unintended consequences on mental and physical health. Growing evidence shows that exposure to the natural environment (e.g., blue-green spaces) can improve human health and wellbeing. In this narrative review, we synthesized the evidence about nature's contributions to health and wellbeing during the first two years of the COVID-19 pandemic. We found that during the pandemic, people experienced multiple types of nature, including both outdoors and indoors. Frequency of visits to outdoor natural areas (i.e., public parks) depended on lockdown severity and socio-cultural contexts. Other forms of nature exposure, such as spending time in private gardens and viewing outdoor greenery from windows, may have increased. The majority of the evidence suggests nature exposure during COVID-19 pandemic was associated with less depression, anxiety, stress, and more happiness and life satisfaction. Additionally, nature exposure was correlated with less physical inactivity and fewer sleep disturbances. Evidence was mixed regarding associations between nature exposure and COVID-related health outcomes, while nature visits might be associated with greater rates of COVID-19 transmission and mortality when proper social distancing measures were not maintained. Findings on whether nature exposure during lockdowns helped ameliorate health inequities by impacting the health of lower-socioeconomic populations more than their higher-socioeconomic counterparts for example were mixed. Based on these findings, we argue that nature exposure may have buffered the negative mental and behavioral impacts of lockdowns during the COVID-19 pandemic. Recovery and resilience during the current crises and future public health crises might be improved with nature-based infrastructure, interventions, designs, and governance.

Indexed as

COVID-19Adaptation, PsychologicalCommunicable Disease ControlHumansPandemicsSARS-CoV-2Coronavirus pandemicCOVID-19GreenspaceHealthNature-based solutionsNature exposure

Identifiers

PMID35395304
PMCPMC8983608

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.