Brittnee Bryer, Chinonso Christian Odebeatu, Wen Ray Lee, Kathryn Vitangcol, Victor Gallegos-Rejas, Nicholas J Osborne, Gail Williams, Darsy Darssan
{"title":"Greenspace exposure and associated health outcomes: a systematic review of reviews.","authors":"Brittnee Bryer, Chinonso Christian Odebeatu, Wen Ray Lee, Kathryn Vitangcol, Victor Gallegos-Rejas, Nicholas J Osborne, Gail Williams, Darsy Darssan","doi":"10.12688/f1000research.148878.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Numerous systematic reviews and meta-analyses have sought to clarify the relationship between greenspace exposure and health outcomes, but the results are inconsistent. We aimed to synthesise all relevant systematic reviews and meta-analyses on this association.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched five databases (PubMed, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature [CINAHL], Scopus, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews) and conducted a manual reference search for systematic reviews and meta-analyses written in English and published in peer-reviewed journals that clearly defined measures of greenspace exposure and reported health outcomes directly attributable to greenspace exposure. A total of 36 systematic reviews published between January 2010 and December 2020 were identified for inclusion in this systematic review of reviews (PROSPERO: CRD42021227422). The methodological quality and risk of bias of included systematic reviews were evaluated by two independent reviewers.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Beneficial effects of greenspace exposure were observed for all-cause and cause-specific mortality, as well as mental health and cognitive function. Ambivalent results were found for cardiovascular and metabolic health, general health and quality of life (QOL), and respiratory health and allergies. Most of the systematic reviews included in the current umbrella review had a low to moderate methodological quality and a high risk of bias.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This umbrella review highlights the link between greenspaces and a variety of health outcomes, emphasising the importance of preserving existing greenspaces and integrating additional vegetation into urban areas to maintain public health.</p>","PeriodicalId":12260,"journal":{"name":"F1000Research","volume":"13 ","pages":"491"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12426596/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"F1000Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.148878.2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Numerous systematic reviews and meta-analyses have sought to clarify the relationship between greenspace exposure and health outcomes, but the results are inconsistent. We aimed to synthesise all relevant systematic reviews and meta-analyses on this association.
Methods: We searched five databases (PubMed, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature [CINAHL], Scopus, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews) and conducted a manual reference search for systematic reviews and meta-analyses written in English and published in peer-reviewed journals that clearly defined measures of greenspace exposure and reported health outcomes directly attributable to greenspace exposure. A total of 36 systematic reviews published between January 2010 and December 2020 were identified for inclusion in this systematic review of reviews (PROSPERO: CRD42021227422). The methodological quality and risk of bias of included systematic reviews were evaluated by two independent reviewers.
Results: Beneficial effects of greenspace exposure were observed for all-cause and cause-specific mortality, as well as mental health and cognitive function. Ambivalent results were found for cardiovascular and metabolic health, general health and quality of life (QOL), and respiratory health and allergies. Most of the systematic reviews included in the current umbrella review had a low to moderate methodological quality and a high risk of bias.
Conclusions: This umbrella review highlights the link between greenspaces and a variety of health outcomes, emphasising the importance of preserving existing greenspaces and integrating additional vegetation into urban areas to maintain public health.
F1000ResearchPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics-Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics (all)
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1646
审稿时长
1 weeks
期刊介绍：
F1000Research publishes articles and other research outputs reporting basic scientific, scholarly, translational and clinical research across the physical and life sciences, engineering, medicine, social sciences and humanities. F1000Research is a scholarly publication platform set up for the scientific, scholarly and medical research community; each article has at least one author who is a qualified researcher, scholar or clinician actively working in their speciality and who has made a key contribution to the article. Articles must be original (not duplications). All research is suitable irrespective of the perceived level of interest or novelty; we welcome confirmatory and negative results, as well as null studies. F1000Research publishes different type of research, including clinical trials, systematic reviews, software tools, method articles, and many others. Reviews and Opinion articles providing a balanced and comprehensive overview of the latest discoveries in a particular field, or presenting a personal perspective on recent developments, are also welcome. See the full list of article types we accept for more information.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
