SynthesisApplied psychology. Health and well-being2026
The effectiveness of nature-based interventions on mental health: A systematic review.
Synthesis in Applied psychology. Health and well-being, 2026. 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 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The effectiveness of nature-based interventions on mental health: A systematic review.Applied psychology. Health and well-being · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As mental health challenges continue to rise globally alongside increasing urbanization and treatment barriers, nature-based interventions (NBIs) may provide an accessible, affordable, and low-risk alternative to conventional mental health treatments. This systematic review synthesizes quantitative evidence on the impact of NBIs on mental health outcomes, following PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Randomized controlled trials with a nature-based intervention group and a non-nature control group, reporting at least one mental health outcome, were included. Of 10,113 identified records, 47 trials met the inclusion criteria. Most interventions involved horticultural therapy, green exercise, or nature walks. Seventeen studies reported significantly greater improvements in mental health, particularly depression, anxiety, and stress in NBI groups compared to controls. NBIs showed no evidence of inferiority to established treatments such as cognitive behavioral therapy or art therapy. However, studies varied widely in design, intervention type, duration, and outcome measures, and many showed moderate to high risk of bias. While initial evidence supports the effectiveness of NBIs, future research should prioritize long-term studies, higher methodological quality, and detailed subgroup analyses to better understand the specific conditions under which NBIs are most beneficial, as well as test the added benefits of combining NBIs with established treatments.
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.