Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38287430›Full record

SynthesisSystematic reviews2024

The impact of gardening on well-being, mental health, and quality of life: an umbrella review and meta-analysis.

I Panțiru, A Ronaldson, N Sima, A Dregan, R Sima

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Systematic reviews, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Green Landscapes of Care: The Potential of Gardens to Support the Well-Being of Asylum Seekers in Ireland.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
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.

I PanțiruDepartment of Horticulture and Landscape, University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine of Cluj-Napoca, Cluj-Napoca-Napoca, Romania.
A RonaldsonCentre for Implementation Science, Health Service and Population Research Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience (IoPPN), King's College London, London, UK.
N SimaDepartment of Technological Sciences, University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine of Cluj-Napoca, Cluj-Napoca-Napoca, Romania.
A DreganDepartment of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience (IoPPN), King's College London, London, UK.
R SimaDepartment of Horticulture and Landscape, University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine of Cluj-Napoca, Cluj-Napoca-Napoca, Romania. rodica.sima@usamvcluj.ro.ORCID 0000-0002-6816-3119

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGardening and horticultural therapy (HT) has been widely recognised as a multicomponent approach that has affected a broad range of health and well-being outcomes. The aim of this umbrella review and meta-analysis was to compare the findings of previous reviews on the impact of multiple gardening interventions and gardening attributes on different well-being constructs.

methodsElectronic databases including PubMed, Web of Science, Science Direct, the Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar were searched from inception to December 2022. Interventional and observational reviews were eligible for inclusion in this umbrella review. Outcome measures included mental well-being, health status and quality of life. The key exposure variables were gardening and horticultural therapy. Narrative synthesis was used to evaluate the overall impact of gardening and HT on study outcomes. For a subsample of studies with available quantitative data, a random effect meta-analysis was conducted.

resultsThis umbrella review included 40 studies (10 interventional studies, 2 observational studies, and 28 mixed interventional and observational studies). The reviewed studies reported an overall positive impact of gardening activities on several measures of mental well-being, quality of life, and health status. Meta-analysis showed a significant and positive effect of gardening and HT activities on well-being (effect size (ES) 0.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.23, 0.87, p < 0.001).

conclusionsEvidence from observational and interventional studies supports a positive role for gardening and HT activities on well-being and general health. Interventional studies with horticultural-based therapies were effective in improving well-being and quality of life both in the general population and vulnerable subgroups. The high degree of heterogeneity in the included studies cautions against any direct clinical implications of the study findings.

Indexed as

Mental HealthQuality of LifeGardeningHealth StatusHumansNarrationGardeningHorticultural therapyMental healthNatureWell-being

Identifiers

PMID38287430
PMCPMC10823662

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.