Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34574854›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021

Green Space and Health in Mainland China: A Systematic Review.

Hania Rahimi-Ardabili, Thomas Astell-Burt, Phi-Yen Nguyen, Juan Zhang, Yu Jiang, Guang-Hui Dong, Xiaoqi Feng

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Hania Rahimi-ArdabiliPopulation Wellbeing and Environment Research Lab (PowerLab), School of Population Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney 2052, Australia.
Thomas Astell-BurtPopulation Wellbeing and Environment Research Lab (PowerLab), School of Health and Society, Faculty of Arts, Social Sciences, and Humanities, University of Wollongong, Wollongong 2522, Australia.
Phi-Yen NguyenPopulation Wellbeing and Environment Research Lab (PowerLab), School of Population Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney 2052, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0476-3385
Juan ZhangSchool of Population Medicine and Public Health, Peking Union Medical College and The Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing 100730, China.ORCID 0000-0002-1161-1072
Yu JiangSchool of Population Medicine and Public Health, Peking Union Medical College and The Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing 100730, China.
Guang-Hui DongDepartment of Environmental and Occupational Health, School of Public Health, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510080, China.ORCID 0000-0002-2578-3369
Xiaoqi FengPopulation Wellbeing and Environment Research Lab (PowerLab), School of Population Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney 2052, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) have become a major cause of premature mortality and disabilities in China due to factors concomitant with rapid economic growth and urbanisation over three decades. Promoting green space might be a valuable strategy to help improve population health in China, as well as a range of co-benefits (e.g., increasing resilience to climate change). No systematic review has so far determined the degree of association between green space and health outcomes in China. This review was conducted to address this gap. Five electronic databases were searched using search terms on green space, health, and China. The review of 83 publications that met eligibility criteria reports associations indicative of various health benefits from more green space, including mental health, general health, healthier weight status and anthropometry, and more favorable cardiometabolic and cerebrovascular outcomes. There was insufficient evidence to draw firm conclusions on mortality, birth outcomes, and cognitive function, and findings on respiratory and infectious outcomes were inconsistent and limited. Future work needs to examine the health benefits of particular types and qualities of green spaces, as well as to take advantage of (quasi-)experimental designs to test greening interventions within the context of China's rapid urbanization and economic growth.

Indexed as

Parks, RecreationalUrbanizationChinaEconomic Developmentgreen spacehealth outcomesmainland Chinasystematic review

Identifiers

PMID34574854
PMCPMC8472560

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.