ReviewBrain sciences2026
Neurobiophilia.
Review in Brain sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Built Environment-Modulated Epigenetics: The Epigenetic Consequences of Architecturally Mediated Allostatic Overload in the Built Environment.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Review
- The Therapeutic Home Environment for Chronic Diseases: A Transdisciplinary Ecosystem for Achieving Migraine Freedom and Managing Comorbid Anxiety, Insomnia, and Chronic Pain.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Hippocampal Neurosustainability for Stress Resilience: A Pro-Neurogenic BDNF-Targeted Architectural Enrichment Framework to Overcome Type 2 Allostatic Overload.Brain sciences · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite unprecedented disconnection from nature and increased urbanisation, the brain still shows an affinity for nature. However, biophilia lacks a neuroscience foundation despite growing evidence of how the brain changes in response to the contrasting influences of urban and natural environments. To address this timely gap, this paper establishes Neurobiophilia through four objectives. First, it identifies seven neuro-needs (7NNs) and establishes their hierarchical order and interconnected outcomes. Second, it maps how natural environments fulfil each of the brain's 7NNs. Third, it explores whether climate change is turning nature into a harmful environment for the brain, specifically with respect to temperature extremes. Fourth, it examines how built environments vary in their enrichment with respect to the 7NNs. This paper highlights critical environmental enrichment challenges in natural environments caused by climate change and in built environments. The novel Neurobiophilia framework established herein identifies these gaps and provides recommendations to achieve neurosustainability through environmental enrichment that sustains adaptive brain responses throughout the lifespan.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.