Ryan Sophia C, Sugg Margaret M, Runkle Jennifer D, Thapa Bhuwan
Department of Geography and Planning Appalachian State University Boone NC USA.
North Carolina Institute for Climate Studies Asheville NC USA.
Geohealth. 2024 Mar 7;8(3):e2023GH000959. doi: 10.1029/2023GH000959. eCollection 2024 Mar.
Mental distress among young people has increased in recent years. Research suggests that greenspace may benefit mental health. The objective of this exploratory study is to further understanding of place-based differences (i.e., urbanity) in the greenspace-mental health association. We leverage publicly available greenspace data sets to operationalize greenspace quantity, quality, and accessibility metrics at the community-level. Emergency department visits for young people (ages 24 and under) were coded for: anxiety, depression, mood disorders, mental and behavioral disorders, and substance use disorders. Generalized linear models investigated the association between greenspace metrics and community-level mental health burden; results are reported as prevalence rate ratios (PRR). Urban and suburban communities with the lowest quantities of greenspace had the highest prevalence of poor mental health outcomes, particularly for mood disorders in urban areas (PRR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.16-1.21), and substance use disorders in suburban areas (PRR: 1.35, 95% CI: 1.28-1.43). In urban, micropolitan, and rural/isolated areas further distance to greenspace was associated with a higher prevalence of poor mental health outcomes; this association was most pronounced for substance use disorders (PRRUrban: 1.31, 95% CI: 1.29-1.32; PRRMicropolitan: 1.47, 95% CI: 1.43-1.51; PRRRural 2.38: 95% CI: 2.19-2.58). In small towns and rural/isolated communities, poor mental health outcomes were more prevalent in communities with the worst greenspace quality; this association was most pronounced for mental and behavioral disorders in small towns (PRR: 1.29, 95% CI: 1.24-1.35), and for anxiety disorders in rural/isolated communities (PRR: 1.61, 95% CI: 1.43-1.82). The association between greenspace metrics and mental health outcomes among young people is place-based with variations across the rural-urban continuum.
近年来，年轻人的精神困扰有所增加。研究表明，绿地可能有益于心理健康。这项探索性研究的目的是进一步了解绿地与心理健康关联中的基于地点的差异（即城市化程度）。我们利用公开可用的绿地数据集来衡量社区层面的绿地数量、质量和可达性指标。对24岁及以下年轻人的急诊就诊情况进行编码，包括：焦虑、抑郁、情绪障碍、精神和行为障碍以及物质使用障碍。广义线性模型研究了绿地指标与社区层面心理健康负担之间的关联；结果以患病率比（PRR）报告。绿地数量最少的城市和郊区社区心理健康状况不佳的患病率最高，特别是城市地区的情绪障碍（PRR：1.19，95%CI：1.16 - 1.21）和郊区的物质使用障碍（PRR：1.35，95%CI：1.28 - 1.43）。在城市、微型都市和农村/偏远地区，离绿地更远与心理健康状况不佳的患病率更高有关；这种关联在物质使用障碍方面最为明显（城市PRR：1.31，95%CI：1.29 - 1.32；微型都市PRR：1.47，95%CI：1.43 - 1.51；农村PRR：2.38，95%CI：2.19 - 2.58）。在小镇和农村/偏远社区，心理健康状况不佳在绿地质量最差的社区更为普遍；这种关联在小镇的精神和行为障碍方面最为明显（PRR：1.29，95%CI：1.24 - 1.35），在农村/偏远社区的焦虑障碍方面（PRR：1.61，95%CI：1.43 - 1.82）。年轻人中绿地指标与心理健康结果之间的关联基于地点，在城乡连续体中存在差异。
