ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2024
Development of an Evaluation Index for Forest Therapy Environments.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2024. 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.
- Forest soundscapes improve mood, restoration and cognition, but not physiological stress or immunity, relative to industrial soundscapes.Scientific reports · 2025Trial
- Forest Therapy Trails: Development and Application of an Assessment Protocol.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Most research on forest therapy has examined the therapeutic effects of forest activity development. There has been insufficient research identifying and evaluating the forest therapy environment. This study aimed to derive a representative forest therapy environment from each of the four evaluation sites, comprising national luxury forests; Scopus, PubMed, Medline, Web of Science, RISS, and DBpia were searched, and 13 studies evaluating forest therapy environments were analyzed and synthesized. After conducting a Conformity Evaluation, one layer of items, comprising anions with low conformity scores, was excluded, and six field measurements, phytoncide, oxygen, illuminance, UV-rays, sound, and anion, were added to increase objectivity. Finally, five forest therapy environment categories and 25 detailed items were derived. Analytic Hierarchy Process-based importance was evaluated to calculate the weight between the final evaluation items. According to the site evaluations, the categories of landscape, forest air, sunlight, sound, and anions appeared, in that order. This study is significant as it developed evaluation items and rating criteria for forest therapy environments, applied these in the field, and derived representative forest therapy environments for each location. This study developed indicators, provided basic data for establishing a therapy environment management plan, and there recommendations were made for an environment suitable for visitors and customizing forest welfare and therapy services.
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.