Factors influencing the effectiveness of nature-based interventions

Several systematic reviews support the use of nature-based interventions (NBIs) as a mechanism of enhancing mental health and wellbeing. However, the available evidence for the effectiveness of these interventions is fragmentary and mixed. The heterogeneity of existing evidence and significant fragm...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:PloS one 2023-07, Vol.18 (7), p.e0273139
Hauptverfasser: Shrestha, Topaz, Chi, Cheryl Voon Yi, Cassarino, Marica, Foley, Sarah, Di Blasi, Zelda
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue 7
container_start_page e0273139
container_title PloS one
container_volume 18
creator Shrestha, Topaz
Chi, Cheryl Voon Yi
Cassarino, Marica
Foley, Sarah
Di Blasi, Zelda
description Several systematic reviews support the use of nature-based interventions (NBIs) as a mechanism of enhancing mental health and wellbeing. However, the available evidence for the effectiveness of these interventions is fragmentary and mixed. The heterogeneity of existing evidence and significant fragmentation of knowledge within the field make it difficult to draw firm conclusions regarding the effectiveness of NBIs. This mixed method umbrella review aims to synthesise evidence on the effectiveness of nature-based interventions through a summative review of existing published systematic reviews and meta-analyses. A systematic search in PsycINFO, PubMed, Greenfile, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, Academic Search Complete (EBSCO), Environment Complete (EBSCO), Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Health Policy Reference Centre and Google Scholar will be performed from inception to present. The search strategy will aim to find published systematic reviews of nature-based interventions (NBIs) where improving health and wellbeing is an explicit goal. This is a mixed method review, and systematic reviews with both quantitative and qualitative data synthesis will be considered. Two authors will independently perform the literature search, record screening, data extraction, and quality assessment of each included systematic review and meta-analysis. The individual qualitative and quantitative syntheses will be conducted in parallel and combined in an overarching narrative synthesis. The quantitative evidence will be used to assess the strength and direction of the effect of nature-based interventions on mental health and wellbeing outcomes. Evidence drawn from qualitative studies will be analysed and synthesised to understand the various pathways to engagement, involvement process and experiential factors that may mediate experiences. The risk of bias of the systematic reviews will be assessed using a 16-item Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR2) checklist.
doi_str_mv 10.1371/journal.pone.0273139
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_gale_incontextgauss_ISR_A757995842</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A757995842</galeid><sourcerecordid>A757995842</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-g992-1bc3193f035b707e7f9f679ae037824e84cadc123a804c64e1297a21458537953</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFz01LxDAQBuAgCq6r_8BDT4KH1nw2zXEpri4sLOjitaTZSdslJNKk4s-3qIf15GkG5uHlHYRuCS4Ik-ThGKbRa1e8Bw8FppIRps7QgihG85Jidn6yX6KrGI8YC1aV5QLVa21SGGM2eOsm8GbwXZZ6yMBaMGn4AA8xZsFmXqdphLzVEQ6zTjDOtzQEH6_RhdUuws3vXKL9-nFfP-fb3dOmXm3zTimak9awuYXFTLQSS5BW2VIqDZjJinKouNEHQyjTFeam5ECokpoSLirBpBJsie5_YjvtoBm8CXOJz9TpKcZm8_rSrKSQSomK03_s7u2vvTuxPWiX-hjc9P3bKfwCWxJrdg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Factors influencing the effectiveness of nature-based interventions</title><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><source>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</source><creator>Shrestha, Topaz ; Chi, Cheryl Voon Yi ; Cassarino, Marica ; Foley, Sarah ; Di Blasi, Zelda</creator><creatorcontrib>Shrestha, Topaz ; Chi, Cheryl Voon Yi ; Cassarino, Marica ; Foley, Sarah ; Di Blasi, Zelda</creatorcontrib><description>Several systematic reviews support the use of nature-based interventions (NBIs) as a mechanism of enhancing mental health and wellbeing. However, the available evidence for the effectiveness of these interventions is fragmentary and mixed. The heterogeneity of existing evidence and significant fragmentation of knowledge within the field make it difficult to draw firm conclusions regarding the effectiveness of NBIs. This mixed method umbrella review aims to synthesise evidence on the effectiveness of nature-based interventions through a summative review of existing published systematic reviews and meta-analyses. A systematic search in PsycINFO, PubMed, Greenfile, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, Academic Search Complete (EBSCO), Environment Complete (EBSCO), Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Health Policy Reference Centre and Google Scholar will be performed from inception to present. The search strategy will aim to find published systematic reviews of nature-based interventions (NBIs) where improving health and wellbeing is an explicit goal. This is a mixed method review, and systematic reviews with both quantitative and qualitative data synthesis will be considered. Two authors will independently perform the literature search, record screening, data extraction, and quality assessment of each included systematic review and meta-analysis. The individual qualitative and quantitative syntheses will be conducted in parallel and combined in an overarching narrative synthesis. The quantitative evidence will be used to assess the strength and direction of the effect of nature-based interventions on mental health and wellbeing outcomes. Evidence drawn from qualitative studies will be analysed and synthesised to understand the various pathways to engagement, involvement process and experiential factors that may mediate experiences. The risk of bias of the systematic reviews will be assessed using a 16-item Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR2) checklist.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0273139</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Public Library of Science</publisher><subject>Analysis ; Care and treatment ; Mental health ; Nature ; Psychological aspects</subject><ispartof>PloS one, 2023-07, Vol.18 (7), p.e0273139</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2023 Public Library of Science</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,860,27901,27902</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Shrestha, Topaz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chi, Cheryl Voon Yi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cassarino, Marica</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Foley, Sarah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Di Blasi, Zelda</creatorcontrib><title>Factors influencing the effectiveness of nature-based interventions</title><title>PloS one</title><description>Several systematic reviews support the use of nature-based interventions (NBIs) as a mechanism of enhancing mental health and wellbeing. However, the available evidence for the effectiveness of these interventions is fragmentary and mixed. The heterogeneity of existing evidence and significant fragmentation of knowledge within the field make it difficult to draw firm conclusions regarding the effectiveness of NBIs. This mixed method umbrella review aims to synthesise evidence on the effectiveness of nature-based interventions through a summative review of existing published systematic reviews and meta-analyses. A systematic search in PsycINFO, PubMed, Greenfile, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, Academic Search Complete (EBSCO), Environment Complete (EBSCO), Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Health Policy Reference Centre and Google Scholar will be performed from inception to present. The search strategy will aim to find published systematic reviews of nature-based interventions (NBIs) where improving health and wellbeing is an explicit goal. This is a mixed method review, and systematic reviews with both quantitative and qualitative data synthesis will be considered. Two authors will independently perform the literature search, record screening, data extraction, and quality assessment of each included systematic review and meta-analysis. The individual qualitative and quantitative syntheses will be conducted in parallel and combined in an overarching narrative synthesis. The quantitative evidence will be used to assess the strength and direction of the effect of nature-based interventions on mental health and wellbeing outcomes. Evidence drawn from qualitative studies will be analysed and synthesised to understand the various pathways to engagement, involvement process and experiential factors that may mediate experiences. The risk of bias of the systematic reviews will be assessed using a 16-item Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR2) checklist.</description><subject>Analysis</subject><subject>Care and treatment</subject><subject>Mental health</subject><subject>Nature</subject><subject>Psychological aspects</subject><issn>1932-6203</issn><issn>1932-6203</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFz01LxDAQBuAgCq6r_8BDT4KH1nw2zXEpri4sLOjitaTZSdslJNKk4s-3qIf15GkG5uHlHYRuCS4Ik-ThGKbRa1e8Bw8FppIRps7QgihG85Jidn6yX6KrGI8YC1aV5QLVa21SGGM2eOsm8GbwXZZ6yMBaMGn4AA8xZsFmXqdphLzVEQ6zTjDOtzQEH6_RhdUuws3vXKL9-nFfP-fb3dOmXm3zTimak9awuYXFTLQSS5BW2VIqDZjJinKouNEHQyjTFeam5ECokpoSLirBpBJsie5_YjvtoBm8CXOJz9TpKcZm8_rSrKSQSomK03_s7u2vvTuxPWiX-hjc9P3bKfwCWxJrdg</recordid><startdate>20230721</startdate><enddate>20230721</enddate><creator>Shrestha, Topaz</creator><creator>Chi, Cheryl Voon Yi</creator><creator>Cassarino, Marica</creator><creator>Foley, Sarah</creator><creator>Di Blasi, Zelda</creator><general>Public Library of Science</general><scope>IOV</scope><scope>ISR</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20230721</creationdate><title>Factors influencing the effectiveness of nature-based interventions</title><author>Shrestha, Topaz ; Chi, Cheryl Voon Yi ; Cassarino, Marica ; Foley, Sarah ; Di Blasi, Zelda</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-g992-1bc3193f035b707e7f9f679ae037824e84cadc123a804c64e1297a21458537953</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Analysis</topic><topic>Care and treatment</topic><topic>Mental health</topic><topic>Nature</topic><topic>Psychological aspects</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Shrestha, Topaz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chi, Cheryl Voon Yi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cassarino, Marica</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Foley, Sarah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Di Blasi, Zelda</creatorcontrib><collection>Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Shrestha, Topaz</au><au>Chi, Cheryl Voon Yi</au><au>Cassarino, Marica</au><au>Foley, Sarah</au><au>Di Blasi, Zelda</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Factors influencing the effectiveness of nature-based interventions</atitle><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle><date>2023-07-21</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>18</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>e0273139</spage><pages>e0273139-</pages><issn>1932-6203</issn><eissn>1932-6203</eissn><abstract>Several systematic reviews support the use of nature-based interventions (NBIs) as a mechanism of enhancing mental health and wellbeing. However, the available evidence for the effectiveness of these interventions is fragmentary and mixed. The heterogeneity of existing evidence and significant fragmentation of knowledge within the field make it difficult to draw firm conclusions regarding the effectiveness of NBIs. This mixed method umbrella review aims to synthesise evidence on the effectiveness of nature-based interventions through a summative review of existing published systematic reviews and meta-analyses. A systematic search in PsycINFO, PubMed, Greenfile, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, Academic Search Complete (EBSCO), Environment Complete (EBSCO), Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Health Policy Reference Centre and Google Scholar will be performed from inception to present. The search strategy will aim to find published systematic reviews of nature-based interventions (NBIs) where improving health and wellbeing is an explicit goal. This is a mixed method review, and systematic reviews with both quantitative and qualitative data synthesis will be considered. Two authors will independently perform the literature search, record screening, data extraction, and quality assessment of each included systematic review and meta-analysis. The individual qualitative and quantitative syntheses will be conducted in parallel and combined in an overarching narrative synthesis. The quantitative evidence will be used to assess the strength and direction of the effect of nature-based interventions on mental health and wellbeing outcomes. Evidence drawn from qualitative studies will be analysed and synthesised to understand the various pathways to engagement, involvement process and experiential factors that may mediate experiences. The risk of bias of the systematic reviews will be assessed using a 16-item Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR2) checklist.</abstract><pub>Public Library of Science</pub><doi>10.1371/journal.pone.0273139</doi><tpages>e0273139</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1932-6203
ispartof PloS one, 2023-07, Vol.18 (7), p.e0273139
issn 1932-6203
1932-6203
language eng
recordid cdi_gale_incontextgauss_ISR_A757995842
source DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; PubMed Central; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry; Public Library of Science (PLoS)
subjects Analysis
Care and treatment
Mental health
Nature
Psychological aspects
title Factors influencing the effectiveness of nature-based interventions
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-31T04%3A18%3A48IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Factors%20influencing%20the%20effectiveness%20of%20nature-based%20interventions&rft.jtitle=PloS%20one&rft.au=Shrestha,%20Topaz&rft.date=2023-07-21&rft.volume=18&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=e0273139&rft.pages=e0273139-&rft.issn=1932-6203&rft.eissn=1932-6203&rft_id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0273139&rft_dat=%3Cgale%3EA757995842%3C/gale%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A757995842&rfr_iscdi=true