Population Wellbeing and Environment Research Lab (PowerLab), School of Health and Society, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia; Early Start, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia; Illawarra Health and Medical Research Institute, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia; Menzies Centre for Health Policy, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Population Wellbeing and Environment Research Lab (PowerLab), School of Health and Society, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia; Early Start, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia; Illawarra Health and Medical Research Institute, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia; Menzies Centre for Health Policy, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Am J Prev Med. 2017 Nov;53(5):616-624. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2017.06.035. Epub 2017 Aug 30.
There are few studies on the potential benefits of green space quantity and quality for child well-being. The authors hypothesized that more and better quality residential green space would be favorable for well-being and that these associations could be subject to effect modification across childhood.
Multilevel linear regression adjusted for demographic and socioeconomic confounders was used to track change in well-being (Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire Total Difficulties Score and "internalizing" and "externalizing" subscales) across five separate occasions among a cohort of 4,968 Australian children aged 4-5 years beginning in 2004. Well-being was assessed with respect to objectively measured green space quantity and parent-reported green space quality, with interaction terms fitted with age to assess for potential effect modification. Data were analyzed in 2015.
Non-linear dose-response associations were observed for favorable well-being in relation to larger quantities of green space and also green space judged to be higher in quality. Favorable perceptions of green space quality were associated with larger quantities of green space regardless of neighborhood socioeconomic circumstances. Benefits for well-being appeared to top out at 21%-40% green space coverage and were reasonably consistent across childhood. Inequality in well-being (especially the internalizing subscale) emerged as children aged in relation to green space quality.
Approximately 21%-40% of residential land-use allocated to green space may be an optimal amount for promoting child well-being, but the quality of this green space increases in importance as children age.
关于绿色空间数量和质量对儿童福祉的潜在益处,研究甚少。作者假设,更多和更好质量的住宅绿色空间将有利于福祉,并且这些关联可能会受到儿童期的影响。
使用多层次线性回归调整人口统计学和社会经济混杂因素,追踪 2004 年开始的 4968 名 4-5 岁澳大利亚儿童在五个不同时间点的福祉变化(困难问卷总困难评分和“内化”和“外化”子量表)。福祉是根据客观测量的绿色空间数量和父母报告的绿色空间质量来评估的,并与年龄拟合交互项,以评估潜在的修饰作用。数据分析于 2015 年进行。
与较大数量的绿色空间以及被认为质量更高的绿色空间相关,观察到了有利于福祉的非线性剂量反应关联。无论邻里社会经济环境如何,对绿色空间质量的有利看法都与更大数量的绿色空间有关。福祉的好处似乎在绿色空间覆盖率为 21%-40%时达到顶峰,并且在整个儿童期相当一致。与绿色空间质量有关的儿童年龄出现了福祉不平等(特别是内化子量表)。
大约 21%-40%的住宅土地用于绿色空间可能是促进儿童福祉的最佳数量,但随着儿童年龄的增长,绿色空间质量的重要性增加。