Trial reportScientific reports2024
The influence of a walk in nature on human resting brain activity: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Walking as a Window to the Brain: Redefining Gait in Neurology.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Highlighting the Role of Mental Fatigue as a Health Risk Factor: A Narrative Review.Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- VR-based nature interventions for health promotion in long-term care facilities (Nature Boost)-a mixed-methods feasibility study protocol.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Closed-loop neuromodulation: a paradigm shift in precision neuroscience for clinical and cognitive applications.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Review
- Nature images are more visually engaging than urban images: evidence from neural oscillations in the brain.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Article
- Nature imagery's influence on ERN amplitude: an examination of Attention Restoration Theory using EEG.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Article
- Evaluating the Well-Being Benefits and Social Value of Volunteer Gardening: Health Economics Meets Behavioral Science.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Behavioral studies suggest that immersion in nature improves affect and executive attention. However, the neural mechanisms underlying these benefits remain unclear. This randomized controlled trial (N = 92) explored differences in self-reported affect and in frontal midline theta (FMθ), a neural oscillation linked to executive attention, between a 40-min, low-intensity nature walk and an urban walk of comparable time and distance-controlling for ambient temperature, humidity, elevation change, walking pace, heart rate, calories burned, and moving time between the two groups. While affect improved for both groups, the nature walkers showed a significantly greater boost in positive affect than the urban walkers. Electroencephalography (EEG) data revealed significantly greater FMθ activity following the urban walk compared to the nature walk, suggesting that the urban walk placed higher demands on executive attention. In contrast, the nature walk allowed executive attention to rest, as indicated by the lower FMθ activity observed after the walk. This study suggests that changes in FMθ may be a potential neural mechanism underlying the attentional strain of urban environments in contrast to the attentional rest in nature.
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.