Bryer Brittnee, Odebeatu Chinonso Christian, Lee Wen Ray, Vitangcol Kathryn, Gallegos-Rejas Victor, Osborne Nicholas J, Williams Gail, Darssan Darsy
School of Public Health, The University of Queensland, Herston, Queensland, Australia.
Child Health Research Centre, The University of Queensland, South Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
F1000Res. 2025 Jul 30;13:491. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.148878.2. eCollection 2024.
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.
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.
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.
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.
众多系统评价和荟萃分析试图阐明绿地暴露与健康结果之间的关系,但结果并不一致。我们旨在综合所有关于这一关联的相关系统评价和荟萃分析。
我们检索了五个数据库(PubMed、Embase、护理及相关健康文献累积索引数据库[CINAHL]、Scopus和Cochrane系统评价数据库),并对以英文撰写且发表在同行评审期刊上的系统评价和荟萃分析进行了手动参考文献检索,这些文献明确界定了绿地暴露的测量方法,并直接报告了可归因于绿地暴露的健康结果。共识别出2010年1月至2020年12月期间发表的36篇系统评价,纳入本综述的系统评价(国际前瞻性系统评价注册库:CRD42021227422)。由两名独立评审员评估纳入系统评价的方法学质量和偏倚风险。
观察到绿地暴露对全因死亡率、特定病因死亡率、心理健康和认知功能有有益影响。在心血管和代谢健康、总体健康和生活质量、呼吸健康和过敏方面发现了矛盾的结果。当前综合评价中纳入的大多数系统评价的方法学质量低至中等,且偏倚风险高。
本综合评价突出了绿地与多种健康结果之间的联系,强调了保护现有绿地以及将更多植被融入城市地区以维护公众健康的重要性。