Warwick Institute for Science of Cities, University of Warwick, Coventry, West Midlands, United Kingdom.
ScHARR, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, South Yorkshire, United Kingdom.
PLoS One. 2018 Sep 12;13(9):e0203000. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0203000. eCollection 2018.
The view that interacting with nature enhances mental wellbeing is commonplace, despite a dearth of evidence or even agreed definitions of 'nature'. The aim of this review was to systematically appraise the evidence for associations between greenspace and mental wellbeing, stratified by the different ways in which greenspace has been conceptualised in quantitative research.
We undertook a comprehensive database search and thorough screening of articles which included a measure of greenspace and validated mental wellbeing tool, to capture aspects of hedonic and/or eudaimonic wellbeing. Quality and risk of bias in research were assessed to create grades of evidence. We undertook detailed narrative synthesis of the 50 studies which met the review inclusion criteria, as methodological heterogeneity precluded meta-analysis.
Results of a quality assessment and narrative synthesis suggest associations between different greenspace characteristics and mental wellbeing. We identified six ways in which greenspace was conceptualised and measured: (i) amount of local-area greenspace; (ii) greenspace type; (iii) visits to greenspace; (iv) views of greenspace; (v) greenspace accessibility; and (vi) self-reported connection to nature. There was adequate evidence for associations between the amount of local-area greenspace and life satisfaction (hedonic wellbeing), but not personal flourishing (eudaimonic wellbeing). Evidence for associations between mental wellbeing and visits to greenspace, accessibility, and types of greenspace was limited. There was inadequate evidence for associations with views of greenspace and connectedness to nature. Several studies reported variation in associations between greenspace and wellbeing by life course stage, gender, levels of physically activity or attitudes to nature.
Greenspace has positive associations with mental wellbeing (particularly hedonic wellbeing), but the evidence is not currently sufficient or specific enough to guide planning decisions. Further studies are needed, based on dynamic measures of greenspace, reflecting access and uses of greenspace, and measures of both eudaimonic and hedonic mental wellbeing.
尽管缺乏证据,甚至没有对“自然”达成一致的定义,但与自然互动可以增进心理健康的观点已十分普遍。本综述旨在系统评估绿地与心理健康之间的关联证据,并按定量研究中对绿地的不同概念化方式进行分层。
我们进行了全面的数据库搜索,并对包含绿地衡量指标和经过验证的心理健康工具的文章进行了彻底筛选,以捕捉享乐和/或幸福的幸福感。评估研究的质量和偏倚风险,以创建证据等级。我们对符合综述纳入标准的 50 项研究进行了详细的叙述性综合,因为方法学异质性排除了荟萃分析。
质量评估和叙述性综合的结果表明,不同绿地特征与心理健康之间存在关联。我们确定了六种概念化和衡量绿地的方式:(i)当地绿地的数量;(ii)绿地类型;(iii)访问绿地;(iv)绿地景观;(v)绿地可达性;以及(vi)自我报告的与自然的联系。有足够的证据表明当地绿地数量与生活满意度(享乐幸福感)之间存在关联,但与个人繁荣(幸福幸福感)无关。与心理健康和访问绿地、可达性和绿地类型之间关联的证据有限。与绿地景观和与自然的联系之间关联的证据不足。一些研究报告称,绿地与幸福感之间的关联因生命阶段、性别、身体活动水平或对自然的态度而异。
绿地与心理健康(特别是享乐幸福感)之间存在积极关联,但目前的证据还不够充分或具体,无法为规划决策提供指导。需要进一步研究,基于对绿地的动态衡量,反映对绿地的访问和使用情况,以及对幸福和享乐幸福感的衡量。