Dataset Information

Spending at least 120?minutes a week in nature is associated with good health and wellbeing.

ABSTRACT: Spending time in natural environments can benefit health and well-being, but exposure-response relationships are under-researched. We examined associations between recreational nature contact in the last seven days and self-reported health and well-being. Participants (n?=?19,806) were drawn from the Monitor of Engagement with the Natural Environment Survey (2014/15-2015/16); weighted to be nationally representative. Weekly contact was categorised using 60?min blocks. Analyses controlled for residential greenspace and other neighbourhood and individual factors. Compared to no nature contact last week, the likelihood of reporting good health or high well-being became significantly greater with contact ?120?mins (e.g. 120-179?mins: ORs [95%CIs]: Health?=?1.59 [1.31-1.92]; Well-being?=?1.23 [1.08-1.40]). Positive associations peaked between 200-300?mins per week with no further gain. The pattern was consistent across key groups including older adults and those with long-term health issues. It did not matter how 120?mins of contact a week was achieved (e.g. one long vs. several shorter visits/week). Prospective longitudinal and intervention studies are a critical next step in developing possible weekly nature exposure guidelines comparable to those for physical activity.

SUBMITTER: White MP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6565732 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Spending at least 120 minutes a week in nature is associated with good health and wellbeing.

White Mathew P MP Alcock Ian I Grellier James J Wheeler Benedict W BW Hartig Terry T Warber Sara L SL Bone Angie A Depledge Michael H MH Fleming Lora E LE

Scientific reports 20190613 1

Spending time in natural environments can benefit health and well-being, but exposure-response relationships are under-researched. We examined associations between recreational nature contact in the last seven days and self-reported health and well-being. Participants (n = 19,806) were drawn from the Monitor of Engagement with the Natural Environment Survey (2014/15-2015/16); weighted to be nationally representative. Weekly contact was categorised using 60 min blocks. Analyses controlled for res ...[more]

PMID: 31197192

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSeveral systematic reviews have reviewed the evidence relating to nature on aspects of children and adolescent's health and wellbeing; however, none have looked at the associations or effectiveness of attending nature-based early childhood education (ECE). The main objective is to systematically review and synthesise the evidence to determine if nature-based ECE enhances children's health, wellbeing and development.MethodsWe will search the following electronic databases (from inception onwards): MEDLINE, Scopus, PsycINFO, ERIC, SportDiscus, Australian Education Index, British Education Index, Child Development and Adolescent studies, and Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts. Grey literature will be identified searching dissertations and reports (e.g. Open Grey, Dissertations Theses Database [ProQuest], and Google Scholar). All types of studies (quantitative and qualitative) conducted in children (aged 2-7 years old) attending ECE who had not started education at primary or elementary school will be included. The exposure of interest will be nature-based ECE settings that integrate nature into their philosophy and/or curriculum and environment. The outcomes of interest will be all aspects of the child's physical, cognitive, social and emotional health wellbeing and development. Two reviewers will independently screen full-text articles. The study methodological quality (or bias) will be appraised using appropriate tools. If feasible, a meta-analysis will be conducted using a random-effect model for studies similar in exposure and outcome. Where studies cannot be included in a meta-analysis, findings will be summarised based on the effect directions and a thematic analysis will be conducted for qualitative studies.DiscussionThis systematic review will capture the state of the current literature on nature-based ECE for child health, wellbeing and development. The results of this study will be of interest to multiple audiences (including researchers and policy makers). Results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. Gaps for future research will be identified and discussed.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42019152582.

Project description:ImportanceHealth care spending in the United States increased substantially from 1995 to 2015 and comprised 17.8% of the economy in 2015. Understanding the relationship between known factors and spending increases over time could inform policy efforts to contain future spending growth.ObjectiveTo quantify changes in spending associated with 5 fundamental factors related to health care spending in the United States: population size, population age structure, disease prevalence or incidence, service utilization, and service price and intensity.Design and settingData on the 5 factors from 1996 through 2013 were extracted for 155 health conditions, 36 age and sex groups, and 6 types of care from the Global Burden of Disease 2015 study and the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation's US Disease Expenditure 2013 project. Decomposition analysis was performed to estimate the association between changes in these factors and changes in health care spending and to estimate the variability across health conditions and types of care.ExposuresChange in population size, population aging, disease prevalence or incidence, service utilization, or service price and intensity.Main outcomes and measuresChange in health care spending from 1996 through 2013.ResultsAfter adjustments for price inflation, annual health care spending on inpatient, ambulatory, retail pharmaceutical, nursing facility, emergency department, and dental care increased by $933.5 billion between 1996 and 2013, from $1.2 trillion to $2.1 trillion. Increases in US population size were associated with a 23.1% (uncertainty interval [UI], 23.1%-23.1%), or $269.5 (UI, $269.0-$270.0) billion, spending increase; aging of the population was associated with an 11.6% (UI, 11.4%-11.8%), or $135.7 (UI, $133.3-$137.7) billion, spending increase. Changes in disease prevalence or incidence were associated with spending reductions of 2.4% (UI, 0.9%-3.8%), or $28.2 (UI, $10.5-$44.4) billion, whereas changes in service utilization were not associated with a statistically significant change in spending. Changes in service price and intensity were associated with a 50.0% (UI, 45.0%-55.0%), or $583.5 (UI, $525.2-$641.4) billion, spending increase. The influence of these 5 factors varied by health condition and type of care. For example, the increase in annual diabetes spending between 1996 and 2013 was $64.4 (UI, $57.9-$70.6) billion; $44.4 (UI, $38.7-$49.6) billion of this increase was pharmaceutical spending.Conclusions and relevanceIncreases in US health care spending from 1996 through 2013 were largely related to increases in health care service price and intensity but were also positively associated with population growth and aging and negatively associated with disease prevalence or incidence. Understanding these factors and their variability across health conditions and types of care may inform policy efforts to contain health care spending.

Dataset Information

Spending at least 120?minutes a week in nature is associated with good health and wellbeing.

Publications

Spending at least 120 minutes a week in nature is associated with good health and wellbeing.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets