ReviewFrontiers in public health2026
From prescription to practice: improving patient access and adherence to nature-based clinical interventions.
Review in Frontiers in public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Clinicians' Perceptions of Nature-Based Interventions in Mental Health Care: A Qualitative Descriptive Study from Pakistan.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Rooted in historical healing traditions and backed by growing clinical evidence, nature-based prescriptions (GRx) are gaining recognition as low-cost, multifaceted strategies to improve disease prevention. These prescriptions encourage healthcare practitioners to harness the curative properties of nature through structured regimes. However, while many countries have piloted successful GRx programs, widespread integration into clinical practice remains limited, especially in vulnerable communities. Objective: We conducted a narrative review synthesizing existing evidence to examine the gap between clinician-initiated GRx and practice. We particularly focus on healthcare system integration, adherence, and equity considerations. Methods: Sources were identified using academic databases including Google Scholar, Scopus and PubMed alongside gray literature such as government documents and private programs. Evidence was synthesized narratively to identify recurring implementation-relevant patterns across clinical, environmental, and patient-level contexts. Results: Our review found that despite the growing adoption of GRx, their integration into routine clinical practice remains largely stagnant. This has largely been due to recurring patterns related to structured frameworks, limited clinical infrastructure, and inequitable access to greenspace. Across all settings, patient follow-through is consistently hindered due to transportation, safety and time constraints, further exacerbated by environmental and socioeconomic barriers. Based on recurring patterns identified in literature, we propose a practice-informed call-to-action framework grounded in three pillars: access to resources, value and return on investment, and accountability. Conclusion: By expanding resource access, embedding GRx into clinical workflows, building cross-sector partnerships and strengthening accountability mechanisms, GRx can move beyond its niche status to become a scalable, equitable, and standardized part of preventive care.
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.