ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2025
Pilot Testing an Ecotherapy Program for Adolescence: Initial Findings and Methodological Reflections.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2025. 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.
- Trusted Professional Multi-Agency Transitions for Young People Facing Multiple Disadvantage - Learning from Co-Production by a Third Sector Partner in the Plymouth Alliance, UK.International journal of integrated careArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Children and young people's mental health and well-being has seen a dramatic decline. In the UK, this has been exacerbated by service retrenchment associated with austerity, with evidence of increasing health inequalities. Service innovation that is grounded in practice, has ongoing learning, and is co-designed with children and young people is required now. This can provide creative solutions within the local context and contribute to the fledgling evidence base that explores complex mechanisms of impact. This methodological reflection describes a co-design process of a bespoke, group-based ecotherapy programme: from early piloting using appreciative enquiry before COVID-19 by the mental health, public health, and Street Services team in the port city of Plymouth, to further developing an evaluation framework through an innovative, matched-funded academia-practice partnership. The findings showcase the benefits of a systems-based approach to public, multi-agency and academic collaboration, facilitated by peer and practitioner researchers and embedded researchers-in-residence. They highlight the need to consider nuances of specific (connecting with self, others, animals, nature) and non-specific active ingredients of the emerging and constantly adapting service (therapeutic relationship with practitioners/carers; nature as therapist, and group dynamics), as well as the value of pragmatic and participatory evaluation methods (distance-travelled, goal-based measures; and ethnographic, qualitative observation), to provide rapid, continuous, and real-time learning and improvement.
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.