ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024
"Eco-caring together" pro-ecological group-based community interventions and mental wellbeing: a systematic scoping review.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- One Health - One Planet - One Mind: integrating eco-anxiety into the One Health paradigm.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2026Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Poor mental wellbeing is a challenge for societies across the world, as is the increasing threat of climate change, and emerging evidence suggests these challenges are interrelated. Green and social prescribing of non-clinical interventions hold promise as a cost-effective and widely accessible way to improve wellbeing, and interest is growing in whether pro-ecological communal activities have mutual benefits for both people and the planet. Objectives: Communal pro-ecological activities are growing in popularity, and research is gathering pace into whether participation influences mental wellbeing. The present systematic review scopes the existing evidence base to explore what is being done, what is being found, and what additional research is required. Methods: Electronic databases (PsychNET, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science) were searched for studies that involved groups of people undertaking pro-ecological activities, where components of mental wellbeing were assessed. Eligibility criteria were purposely broad, including all study designs and participants across the lifespan. Results: Thirty-seven eligible studies were identified. Nearly half of the studies used mixed-method designs, and most studies used surveys or interviews to evaluate outcomes. Most pro-ecological activities involved planting vegetation, and habitat creation, maintenance, or restoration. Methodological quality varied considerably. Among the perceived therapeutic mechanisms reported, the social elements of the interventions were prominent. Discussion: Coherent synthesis of the current evidence base is challenging given the heterogeneous range of methods, samples, and interventions within the studies. However, the results here demonstrate promise that with future research and better methodological rigor, pro-ecological group-based interventions hold the potential to improve mental wellbeing and influence sustainable behavior. Systematic review registration: https://osf.io/vmpr6/.
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.