eprintid: 10118194
rev_number: 19
eprint_status: archive
userid: 608
dir: disk0/10/11/81/94
datestamp: 2021-01-14 16:03:09
lastmod: 2021-09-28 22:21:20
status_changed: 2021-01-14 16:03:09
type: article
metadata_visibility: show
creators_name: Fairbrass, AJ
creators_name: Chatterjee, H
creators_name: Jones, KE
creators_name: Osborn, D
title: Human responses to nature- and culture-based non-clinical interventions: a systematised review
ispublished: inpress
divisions: UCL
divisions: B02
divisions: C08
divisions: D09
divisions: F99
divisions: B04
divisions: C06
divisions: F57
divisions: C04
divisions: F34
keywords: culture, evidence, health, intervention, nature, review
note: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
abstract: AIMS: A wide range of non-clinical nature- and culture-based interventions for the treatment of health issues have been evaluated in evidence and systematic reviews. However, common outcomes of these interventions have not been identified and neuro-bio-psychosocial mechanisms underlying how these interventions impact health are not well understood. We conducted a systematised review and compared the evidence for human responses to nature- and culture-based non-clinical interventions for a range of health issues and assessed the proposed mechanisms and conceptual frameworks underlying these interventions. METHODS: Comprehensive searches were conducted up to May 2018 in six bibliographic databases: Campbell Collaboration, Cochrane Library, Embase, Medline, Scopus and Web of Science. Studies included were evidence reviews or systematic reviews on any nature- or culture-based non-clinical intervention to improve the health of individuals. RESULTS: A total of 60 reviews were included (33 of nature, 26 of culture, 1 of both) covering 1480 individual studies and trials. The most common review types were systematic (32), literature (22) and meta-analyses (6). Positive effects on mental health were reported for the majority of interventions, while other health outcomes such as immunity were not well represented in the review literature. A range of secondary outcomes were common to both nature- and culture-based interventions including psychological and emotional impacts, social interaction and relationship development, skills development, physical health benefits, and positive impact of the intervention environment. Only two reviews proposed conceptual frameworks, and the neuro-bio-psychosocial mechanisms that underpin the health changes were not clarified. CONCLUSION: Future research should focus on reviewing the evidence gaps for non-clinical nature- and culture-based interventions with an emphasis on implementing larger sample sizes, cohort and longitudinal studies, which deploy a wider range of mixed-methods, quasi-experimental and randomised control trials. There should also be agreement on terminology and developing conceptual frameworks to better understand the neuro-bio-psychosocial mechanisms underlying interventions.
date: 2020-12-15
date_type: published
official_url: https://doi.org/10.1177/1757913920967036
oa_status: green
full_text_type: pub
language: eng
primo: open
primo_central: open_green
verified: verified_manual
elements_id: 1838178
doi: 10.1177/1757913920967036
lyricists_name: Chatterjee, Helen
lyricists_name: Fairbrass, Alison
lyricists_name: Jones, Katherine
lyricists_name: Osborn, Daniel
lyricists_id: HCHAT26
lyricists_id: AFAIR75
lyricists_id: KEJON62
lyricists_id: DOSBO77
actors_name: Flynn, Bernadette
actors_id: BFFLY94
actors_role: owner
full_text_status: public
publication: Perspectives in Public Health
event_location: United States
citation:        Fairbrass, AJ;    Chatterjee, H;    Jones, KE;    Osborn, D;      (2020)    Human responses to nature- and culture-based non-clinical interventions: a systematised review.                   Perspectives in Public Health        10.1177/1757913920967036 <https://doi.org/10.1177/1757913920967036>.    (In press).    Green open access   
 
document_url: https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10118194/1/1757913920967036.pdf