Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37002667›Full record

ArticlePerspectives in public health2023

Encouraging planting in urban front gardens: a focus group study.

R H Frost, N Murtagh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Perspectives in public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

R H FrostResearch Department of Primary Care and Population Health, UCL, Royal Free Campus, Rowland Hill Street, London NW3 2PF, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3523-0052
N MurtaghThe Bartlett School of Sustainable Construction, UCL, London, UK.

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsEncouraging planting in front gardens offers mental and physical health benefits, as well as positive local environmental impacts such as reducing flood risk and improving air quality. However, urban front garden greenery has reduced in recent years. We aimed to explore adults' views regarding planting greenery in front gardens, barriers and facilitators, and their understanding of health and environmental impacts, to identify appropriate intervention mechanisms for behaviour change.

methodsWe carried out five online focus groups with 20 participants aged 20-64 in England, purposively sampled for variation according to age, gender, home ownership, income, ethnicity and residing in an urban or suburban area. We audio recorded each focus group, transcribed it verbatim and analysed transcripts using thematic analysis.

resultsFront gardening was a relaxing activity that provided benefits including increased wellbeing, fresh air and vitamin D. Planting in front gardens depended heavily on available time and space, garden orientation, local security and the weather. Front gardens could be a place for social interaction. Participants tended to prioritise neatness and tidiness over greenery. Lack of knowledge and low self-efficacy were key barriers. There was little awareness of the environmental benefits of front garden greenery; however, reducing flood risk and encouraging biodiversity were viewed positively.

conclusionInitiatives to encourage front garden planting should focus on plants that require little knowledge to acquire and care for, are suitable to the local environmental conditions and with a visual impact of neatness and bright colour. Campaigns should draw attention to local flood risk reduction and increasing biodiversity, in addition to personal health benefits.

Indexed as

GardeningGardensAdultEnvironmentEthnicityFocus GroupsHumansenvironment and public healthgardenshealth behaviourqualitative research

Identifiers

PMID37002667
PMCPMC10623614

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.