ArticleUrban forestry & urban greening2022
Evaluating the risk of accessing green spaces in COVID-19 pandemic: A model for public urban green spaces (PUGS) in London.
Article in Urban forestry & urban greening, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessing cross cultural urban park emotional wellbeing impact in Shanghai and London.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Green infrastructure inequality in the context of COVID-19: Taking parks and trails as examples.Urban forestry & urban greening · 2023Article
- Associations between COVID-19 risk, multiple environmental exposures, and housing conditions: A study using individual-level GPS-based real-time sensing data.Applied geography (Sevenoaks, England) · 2023Article
- How Do Ecological and Recreational Features of Waterfront Space Affect Its Vitality? Developing Coupling Coordination and Enhancing Waterfront Vitality.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) at the beginning of 2020 has restricted the human population indoor with some allowance for recreation in green spaces for social interaction and daily exercise. Understanding and measuring the risk of COVID-19 infection during public urban green spaces (PUGS) visits is essential to reduce the spread of the virus and improve well-being. This study builds a data-fused risk assessment model to evaluate the risk of visiting the PUGS in London. Three parameters are used for risk evaluation: the number of new cases at the middle-layer super output area (MSOA) level, the accessibility of each public green space and the Indices of Multiple Deprivation at the lower-layer super output area (LSOA) level. The model assesses 1357 PUGS and identifies the risk in three levels, high, medium and low, according to the results of a two-step clustering analysis. The spatial variability of risk across the city is demonstrated in the evaluation. The evaluation of risk can provide a better metric to the decision-making at both the individual level, on deciding which green space to visit, and the borough level, on how to implement restricting measures on green space access.
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.