ArticleBMJ open2024
Causal evidence of the association between green and blue spaces (GBS) and maternal and neonatal health: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 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.
- Dutch nationwide registry study to identify spatial, contextual and environmental inequalities in birth outcomes.BMJ public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionPrevious systematic reviews investigating the effects of green and blue space (GBS) on maternal and neonatal health have mainly focused on cross-sectional evidence, limiting potential causal inferences. The last review on the topic was published in January 2024. This review focused on residential greenness effects and neonatal health only but did not include other green/blue space measures, or maternal health outcomes. This review also only included papers published up to June 2023; discounting the 15 studies that have been published since. Thus, this study will capture the growing number of studies that generate causal evidence and aims to investigate the association between GBS and maternal and/or neonatal health. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The study protocol was developed with reference to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. This review will include study designs such as experiments, quasi-experiments, longitudinal studies and more. The study independent variable must be a GBS, green space and/or blue space measure. Eligible maternal health outcomes are those reported during pregnancy and up to 1 year after pregnancy. Neonatal health outcomes are limited to neonates no older than 28 days. A total of seven online databases will be searched: Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, PsycInfo, Embase, Environment Complete, and Maternity and Infant Care Database. Abstract and full-text screenings will be undertaken by three reviewers. Risk of bias assessment will be conducted based on the Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies-of Exposure framework.A narrative synthesis will be undertaken. If sufficiently comparable studies are identified, meta-analyses using random effects models will be conducted. We will explore heterogeneity using the I ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required as all the data will be derived from published primary studies that have already obtained ethical permissions. The findings will be disseminated through relevant conferences and peer-reviewed publications. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023396372.
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.