ArticleBMC public health2026
Community gardening as a conduit for bolstering wellbeing, employment, education and volunteering in vulnerable communities: a feasibility study.
Article in BMC public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGrowing evidence promotes community gardening as an effective community-based initiative to enhance the wellbeing of community members, including those considered vulnerable. Whilst this expanding evidence-base is encouraging, little is known about the feasibility of community gardening thus limiting its scalability.
methodsThe current mixed-method study assesses the feasibility, acceptability and implementation of the Community Greening program delivered in vulnerable communities in New South Wales, Australia. Data was gathered from 33 survey participants, 39 interview participants, and case notes from seven sites.
resultsFindings demonstrate that participants have particular needs in wellbeing and employment outcomes, especially for those with reported disability. Attendance is variable with identified enablers and barriers. Satisfaction with the program is evident with suggestions for improvements. Finally, fidelity of implementation is strong, with an opportunity to increase community-led workshops, and enhance future implementation informed by the reported enablers and barriers.
conclusionsWith the positive impact of community gardening now established, findings guide how we effectively resource and sustainably implement programs with the fidelity required to realise their potential.
trial registrationN/A.
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.