ArticleBMC public health2023
Natural land cover positively correlates with COVID-19 health outcomes.
Article in BMC public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Features of the land use and COVID-19 cases and deaths in urban and land counties in Poland throughout the pandemic: a machine learning approach.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Assessing eco-geographic influences on COVID-19 transmission: a global analysis.Scientific reports · 2024Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) poses special challenges for societies, as the disease causes millions of deaths. Although the direct prevention measures affect the prevalence and mortality the most, the other indirect factors, including natural environments and economics, could not be neglected. Evaluating the effect of natural land cover on COVID-19 health outcomes is an urgent and crucial public health topic.
methodsHere, we examine the relationships between natural land cover and the prevalence and mortality of COVID-19 in the United States. To probe the effects of long-term living with natural land cover, we extract county-level land cover data from 2001 to 2019. Based on statistically spatial tests, we employ the Spatial Simultaneous Autoregressive (SAC) Model to estimate natural land cover's impact and monetary values on COVID-19 health outcomes. To examine the short-term effects of natural environments, we build a seasonal panel data set about the greenery index and COVID-19 health outcomes. The panel SAC model is used to detect the relationship between the greenery index and seasonal COVID-19 health outcomes.
resultsA 1% increase in open water or deciduous forest is associated with a 0.004-death and 0.163-conformed-case, or 0.006-death and 0.099-confirmed-case decrease in every 1,000 people. Converting them into monetary value, for the mortality, a 1% increase in open water, deciduous forest, or evergreen forest in a county is equivalent to a 212-, 313-, or 219-USD increase in household income in the long term. Moreover, for the prevalence, a 1% change in open water, deciduous forest, or mixed forest is worth a 382-, 230-, or 650-USD increase in household income. Furthermore, a rational development intensity is also critical to reduce the risk of the COVID-19 pandemic. More greenery in the short term is also linked to lower prevalence and mortality.
conclusionsOur study underscores the importance of incorporating natural land cover as a means of mitigating the risks and negative consequences of future pandemics like COVID-19 and promoting overall public health.
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.