Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39268220›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2024

Neurosustainability.

Mohamed Hesham Khalil

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Neurobiophilia.Brain sciences · 2026
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Mohamed Hesham KhalilDepartment of Architecture, Faculty of Architecture and History of Art, School of Arts and Humanities, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While the human brain has evolved extraordinary abilities to dominate nature, modern living has paradoxically trapped it in a contemporary "cage" that stifles neuroplasticity. Within this modern environment lurk unseen natural laws with power to sustain the human brain's adaptive capacities - if consciously orchestrated into the environments we design. For too long our contemporary environments have imposed an unyielding static state, while still neglecting the brain's constant adaptive nature as it evolves to dominate the natural world with increasing sophistication. The theory introduced in this article aims to go back in nature without having to go back in time, introducing and expounding Neurosustainability as a novel paradigm seeing beyond the contemporary confines to architect environments and brains in parallel. Its integrated neuro-evidenced framework proposes four enrichment scopes-spatial, natural, aesthetic, and social-each holding multifaceted attributes promising to sustain regions like the hippocampus, cortex and amygdala. Neurosustainability aims to liberate the quintessential essence of nature to sustain and enhance neuroplastic processes through a cycle that begins with design and extends through epigenetic changes. This paradigm shift aims to foster cognitive health and wellness by addressing issues like stress, depression, anxiety and cognitive decline common in the contemporary era thereby offering a path toward a more neurosustainable era aiming to nurture the evolution of the human brain now and beyond.

Indexed as

adult hippocampal neurogenesisamygdalacortical thicknessenvironmental enrichmenthuman brain healthmental health and modern lifestylesnatureneuroplasticity

Identifiers

PMID39268220
PMCPMC11390526

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.