ArticleJournal of healthy eating and active living2024
Factors influencing likelihood of participation in green social prescriptions in an international sample.
Article in Journal of healthy eating and active living, 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.
- Clinicians' Perceptions of Nature-Based Interventions in Mental Health Care: A Qualitative Descriptive Study from Pakistan.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Nature Contact as an Aspect of Active Living.Journal of healthy eating and active living · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Green social prescriptions (GSPs) include interventions designed to combat sedentary behavior and preventable diseases by leveraging the benefits of nature-based physical activity. As these programs are still evolving, there is limited data regarding the likelihood of participation from an international perspective. This study examined factors influencing participation likelihood in GSPs across various geographic contexts, levels of greenness, nature-relatedness, well-being, and socio-demographic variables. We conducted an online, cross-sectional survey with 2,467 participants from Australia, India, Singapore, the United Kingdom, and the United States in September 2022. Participants reported their likelihood of participating in GSPs with four distinct outcomes, and we calculated an aggregate participation likelihood score. We used linear regression models to analyze associations between variables and participation likelihood, including models stratified by gender and country. Results showed that a more positive attitude towards nature was the strongest predictor of participation likelihood. Positive associations were found with educational attainment, financial comfort, and time spent in greenspace, while male gender and better well-being were linked to lower participation likelihood. Some differences in associations were revealed when stratified by country. An interaction between urban setting and greenness indicated that individuals in greener urban areas, particularly males, were less likely to feel the need for GSPs. These findings highlight that GSPs are likely to reach people who already share positive attitudes towards nature. Results indicate targeted interventions may be useful for individuals with less favorable attitudes towards nature, and males in particular, to increase likelihood of participation. Further research should explore cultural differences and the impact of health status on GSP participation. Understanding these factors can inform more equitable and effective GSP implementation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40385264PMC12080408What 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.