ArticlePloS one2026
Comparative effectiveness of horticultural therapy modalities for cognitive function and depressive symptoms in older adults with cognitive impairment: Protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
introductionCognitive impairment in older adults is often accompanied by depressive symptoms, leading to reduced quality of life and increased risk of disability and mortality. Horticultural therapy has been increasingly used as a non-pharmacological intervention; however, its effectiveness may vary across different intervention modalities and delivery characteristics. Existing meta-analyses have primarily focused on overall effects and have not compared different horticultural therapy modalities. This study aims to evaluate and rank the comparative effectiveness of horticultural therapy delivered through different modalities using a network meta-analysis. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving older adults with cognitive impairment will be included. The intervention group will receive horticultural therapy in addition to routine care, while the control group will receive routine care alone. Eight databases (PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Wanfang Database) will be searched from inception to May 2026. Interventions will be classified based on delivery characteristics, including environmental settings, cultivation substrates, and levels of participant engagement. Primary outcomes are cognitive function and depressive symptoms. Two reviewers will independently perform study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. Pairwise meta-analysis and frequentist network meta-analysis will be conducted using the R (package "netmeta"), and treatment rankings will be estimated using surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required. Findings will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication.
trial registrationPROSPERO registration number: CRD420251185714.
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.