Do sex and gender modify the association between green space and physical health? A systematic review.

A growing literature shows that green space can have protective effects on human health. As a marginalized group, women often have worse life outcomes than men, including disparities in some health outcomes. Given their marginalization, women might have "more to gain" than men from living near green spaces. Yet, limited research has deliberately studied whether green space-health associations are stronger for women or men. We conducted a systematic review to synthesize empirical evidence on whether sex or gender modifies the protective associations between green space and seven physical health outcomes (cardiovascular disease, cancer, diabetes, general physical health, non-malignant respiratory disease, mortality, and obesity-related health outcomes). After searching five databases, we identified 62 articles (including 81 relevant analyses) examining whether such effect modification existed. We classified analyses based on whether green space-health were stronger for women, no sex/gender differences were detected, or such associations were stronger for men. Most analyses found that green space-physical health associations were stronger for women than for men when considering study results across all selected health outcomes. Also, women showed stronger protective associations with green space than men for obesity-related outcomes and mortality. Additionally, the protective green space-health associations were slightly stronger among women for green land cover (greenness, NDVI) than for public green space (parks), and women were also favored over men when green space was measured very close to one's home (0-500 m). Further, the green space-health associations were stronger for women than for men in Europe and North America, but not in other continents. As many government agencies and nongovernmental organizations worldwide work to advance gender equity, our review shows that green space could help reduce some gender-based health disparities. More robust empirical studies (e.g., experimental) are needed to contribute to this body of evidence.

Greenspace and park use associated with less emotional distress among college students in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic has negatively affected many people's psychological health. Impacts may be particularly severe among socially vulnerable populations such as college students, a group predisposed to mental health problems. Outdoor recreation and visits to greenspaces such as parks offer promising pathways for addressing the mental health challenges associated with COVID-19. During the early stages of the pandemic (March-May 2020), we surveyed 1280 college students at four large public universities across the United States (U.S.) to assess how, and why, outdoor recreation and park use changed since the emergence of COVID-19. We also measured students' self-reported levels of emotional distress (a proxy for psychological health) and assessed potential demographic and contextual correlates of distress, including county-level per capita park area and greenness, using generalized linear models. We found that 67% of students reported limiting outdoor activities and 54% reported reducing park use during the pandemic. Students who reduced their use of outdoor spaces cited structural reasons (e.g., lockdowns), concerns about viral transmission, and negative emotions that obstructed active lifestyles. Students who maintained pre-pandemic park use levels expressed a desire to be outdoors in nature, often with the explicit goal of improving mental and physical health. Emotional distress among students was widespread. Models showed higher levels of emotional distress were associated with reducing park use during the pandemic and residing in counties with a smaller area of parks per capita. This study of U.S. college students supports the value of park-based recreation as a health promotion strategy for diverse populations of young adults during a time of crisis.

"Messy transitions": Students' perspectives on the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on higher education.

The COVID-19 pandemic affected every area of students' lives, especially their education. Limited research has explored students' experiences during the pandemic. This study documents how students across seven United States universities viewed the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on their educational experiences and how these students reacted to these impacts. We present qualitative data from an online survey conducted between March and May 2020 that resulted in 1267 respondents with relevant data. Conventional content analysis with an inductive approach was used to analyze open-ended responses to the question, "We are interested in the ways that the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has changed how you feel and behave. What are the first three ways that come to mind?" Six categories emerged from the data: changes in instruction delivery mode, changes in schedule and everyday life, increased technology use, decreased academic opportunities and resources, negative reaction to the changes in higher education, and positive reactions to changes in higher education. Among our recommendations for practice are personalized approaches to material delivery and evaluation, synchronous classes and opportunities to connect with professors and students, and convenient support services.

Could nature help children rise out of poverty? Green space and future earnings from a cohort in ten U.S. cities.

BACKGROUND: Growing up in poverty is associated with poor health, and the American Dream of upward mobility is becoming an illusion for many low-income children. But nearby green space can support academic achievement, creativity, and emotional regulation, and these traits might help children rise out of poverty. OBJECTIVES: To examine the relationship between recent incomes of children born into poverty in the ten largest U.S. cities and densities of residential green space during childhood. METHODS: We calculate park proximity, park acreage, new park development, and NDVI greenness for 1980-1990 from Landsat and Trust for Public Land data. We obtain the 2014 income for children born between 1978 and 1982 into families in poverty from The Opportunity Atlas cohort, aggregated at the tract level (n = 5849). RESULTS: Conditional autoregressive (CAR) models of tracts show statistically significant associations between income rank and above-average levels of greenness but not between income rank and park measures, adjusting for individual and neighborhood confounders and spatial autocorrelation. We estimate that, over a 30-year career, children growing up in tracts with the most vegetative cover will earn cumulatively $28,000 more than children growing up in tracts with the least cover, on average. Tracts with lower than average levels of precipitation, higher disadvantage, higher population density, or higher annual temperatures do not show beneficial effects of green space. CONCLUSIONS: Greenness may be weakly associated with children rising out of poverty in wetter, cooler, less-dense, more advantaged census tracts.

The Dynamic Relationship between Social Cohesion and Urban Green Space in Diverse Communities: Opportunities and Challenges to Public Health.

Social cohesion is a key factor within social determinants of health and well-being. Urban green spaces can provide environments that potentially facilitate meaningful and positive social interactions that promote social cohesion, equity, human health, and well-being. However, the lack of integration of existing research on social cohesion, urban green spaces, and public health in diverse (e.g., racially and ethnically) communities limits culturally relevant strategies to address health disparities. In this manuscript, we synthesize research on the potential of urban green spaces to promote social cohesion and public health in historically excluded communities. Particularly, we explore the development of social cohesion as it relates to the social environment, built environment, leisure opportunities, green space maintenance, safety, and green gentrification. We highlight key factors and their application to meet opportunities and challenges to social and public health. A conceptual framework is presented to provide an overview and illustrate connections found in the literature.

Correlates of stress are interactive and not unidimensional: Evidence from U.S. college students early in the COVID-19 pandemic.

Studies have investigated various aspects of how the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted college students' well-being. However, the complex relationships between stress and its correlates have received limited attention. Thus, the main objective of this study is to evaluate multiplicative associations between stress and demographic, lifestyle, and other negative emotion factors during the pandemic. We used data from a survey with 2,534 students enrolled in seven U.S. universities and analyzed such data with generalized additive Tobit models and pairwise interaction terms. The results highlighted associations and interactions between myriad factors such as students' social class, income, parental education, body mass index (BMI), amount of exercise, and knowing infected people in the student's communities. For instance, we found that the associations between feeling irritable and sad due to the pandemic were interactive, resulting in higher associated stress for students with higher levels of parents' education. Furthermore, associations between taking precautionary actions (i.e., avoiding travel and large gatherings) and stress varied with the intensity of negative feelings (i.e., sadness and irritability). Considering these interaction terms, the results highlighted a great inequality in pandemic-related stress within low income, lower social class, and higher BMI students. This study is among the earliest that employed a stratified approach with numerous interaction terms to better understand the multiplicative associations between different factors during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The neighborhood built environment and COVID-19 hospitalizations.

Research on the associations between the built environment and COVID-19 outcomes has mostly focused on incidence and mortality. Also, few studies on the built environment and COVID-19 have controlled for individual-level characteristics across large samples. In this study, we examine whether neighborhood built environment characteristics are associated with hospitalization in a cohort of 18,042 individuals who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 between May and December 2020 in the Denver metropolitan area, USA. We use Poisson models with robust standard errors that control for spatial dependence and several individual-level demographic characteristics and comorbidity conditions. In multivariate models, we find that among individuals with SARS-CoV-2 infection, those living in multi-family housing units and/or in places with higher particulate matter (PM2.5) have a higher incident rate ratio (IRR) of hospitalization. We also find that higher walkability, higher bikeability, and lower public transit access are linked to a lower IRR of hospitalization. In multivariate models, we did not find associations between green space measures and the IRR of hospitalization. Results for non-Hispanic white and Latinx individuals highlight substantial differences: higher PM2.5 levels have stronger positive associations with the IRR of hospitalization for Latinx individuals, and density and overcrowding show stronger associations for non-Hispanic white individuals. Our results show that the neighborhood built environment might pose an independent risk for COVID-19 hospitalization. Our results may inform public health and urban planning initiatives to lower the risk of hospitalization linked to COVID-19 and other respiratory pathogens.

Beyond "bluespace" and "greenspace": A narrative review of possible health benefits from exposure to other natural landscapes.

Numerous studies have highlighted the physical and mental health benefits of contact with nature, typically in landscapes characterized by plants (i.e., "greenspace") and water (i.e., "bluespace"). However, natural landscapes are not always green or blue, and the effects of other landscapes are worth attention. This narrative review attempts to overcome this limitation of past research. Rather than focusing on colors, we propose that natural landscapes are composed of at least one of three components: (1) plants (e.g., trees, flowering plants, grasses, sedges, mosses, ferns, and algae), (2) water (e.g., rivers, canals, lakes, and oceans), and/or (3) rocks and minerals, including soil. Landscapes not dominated by plants or liquid-state water include those with abundant solid-state water (e.g., polar spaces) and rocks or minerals (e.g., deserts and caves). Possible health benefits of solid-state water or rock/mineral dominated landscapes include both shorter-term (e.g., viewing images) and longer-term (e.g., living in these landscapes) exposure durations. Reported benefits span improved emotional and mental states and medical treatment resources for respiratory conditions and allergies. Mechanisms underlying the health benefits of exposure consist of commonly discussed theories in the "greenspace" and "bluespace" literature (i.e., instoration and restoration) as well as less discussed pathways in that literature (i.e., post-traumatic growth, self-determination, supportive environment theory, and place attachment). This is the first review to draw attention to the potential salutogenic value of natural landscapes beyond "greenspace" and "bluespace." It is also among the first to highlight the limitations and confusion that result from classifying natural landscapes using color. Since the extant literature on natural landscapes - beyond those with abundant plants or liquid-state water - is limited in regard to quantity and quality, additional research is needed to understand their restorative potential and therapeutic possibilities.

Racial, Ethnic, and Socioeconomic Disparities in Multiple Measures of Blue and Green Spaces in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Several studies have evaluated whether the distribution of natural environments differs between marginalized and privileged neighborhoods. However, most studies restricted their analyses to a single or handful of cities and used different natural environment measures. OBJECTIVES: We evaluated whether natural environments are inequitably distributed based on socioeconomic status (SES) and race/ethnicity in the contiguous United States. METHODS: We obtained SES and race/ethnicity data (2015-2019) for all U.S. Census tracts. For each tract, we calculated the Normalized Different Vegetation Index (NDVI) for 2020, NatureScore (a proprietary measure of the quantity and quality of natural elements) for 2019, park cover for 2020, and blue space for 1984-2018. We used generalized additive models with adjustment for potential confounders and spatial autocorrelation to evaluate associations of SES and race/ethnicity with NDVI, NatureScore, park cover, and odds of containing blue space in all tracts (n=71,532) and in urban tracts (n=45,338). To compare effect estimates, we standardized NDVI, NatureScore, and park cover so that beta coefficients presented a percentage increase or decrease of the standard deviation (SD). RESULTS: Tracts with higher SES had higher NDVI, NatureScore, park cover, and odds of containing blue space. For example, urban tracts in the highest median household income quintile had higher NDVI [44.8% of the SD (95% CI: 42.8, 46.8)] and park cover [16.2% of the SD (95% CI: 13.5, 19.0)] compared with urban tracts in the lowest median household income quintile. Across all tracts, a lower percentage of non-Hispanic White individuals and a higher percentage of Hispanic individuals were associated with lower NDVI and NatureScore. In urban tracts, we observed weak positive associations between percentage non-Hispanic Black and NDVI, NatureScore, and park cover; we did not find any clear associations for percentage Hispanics. DISCUSSION: Multiple facets of the natural environment are inequitably distributed in the contiguous United States. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP11164.

Greenness and equity: Complex connections between intra-neighborhood contexts and residential tree planting implementation.

Associations between neighborhood greenness and socioeconomic status (SES) are established, yet intra-neighborhood context and SES-related barriers to tree planting remain unclear. Large-scale tree planting implementation efforts are increasingly common and can improve human health, strengthen climate adaptation, and ameliorate environmental inequities. Yet, these efforts may be ineffective without in-depth understanding of local SES inequities and barriers to residential planting. We recruited 636 residents within and surrounding the Oakdale Neighborhood of Louisville, Kentucky, USA, and evaluated associations of individual and neighborhood-level sociodemographic indicators with greenness levels at multiple scales. We offered no-cost residential tree planting and maintenance to residents within a subsection of the neighborhood and examined associations of these sociodemographic indicators plus baseline greenness levels with tree planting adoption among 215 eligible participants. We observed positive associations of income with Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) and leaf area index (LAI) within all radii around homes, and within yards of residents, that varied in strength. There were stronger associations of income with NDVI in front yards but LAI in back yards. Among Participants of Color, associations between income and NDVI were stronger than with Whites and exhibited no association with LAI. Tree planting uptake was not associated with income, education, race, nor employment status, but was positively associated with lot size, home value, lower population density, and area greenness. Our findings reveal significant complexity of intra-neighborhood associations between SES and greenness that could help shape future research and equitable greening implementation. Results show that previously documented links between SES and greenspace at large scales extend to residents' yards, highlighting opportunities to redress greenness inequities on private property. Our analysis found that uptake of no-cost residential planting and maintenance was nearly equal across SES groups but did not redress greenness inequity. To inform equitable greening, further research is needed to evaluate culture, norms, perceptions, and values affecting tree planting acceptance among low-SES residents.

Nature's contributions in coping with a pandemic in the 21st century: A narrative review of evidence during COVID-19.

While COVID-19 lockdowns have slowed coronavirus transmission, such structural measures also have unintended consequences on mental and physical health. Growing evidence shows that exposure to the natural environment (e.g., blue-green spaces) can improve human health and wellbeing. In this narrative review, we synthesized the evidence about nature's contributions to health and wellbeing during the first two years of the COVID-19 pandemic. We found that during the pandemic, people experienced multiple types of nature, including both outdoors and indoors. Frequency of visits to outdoor natural areas (i.e., public parks) depended on lockdown severity and socio-cultural contexts. Other forms of nature exposure, such as spending time in private gardens and viewing outdoor greenery from windows, may have increased. The majority of the evidence suggests nature exposure during COVID-19 pandemic was associated with less depression, anxiety, stress, and more happiness and life satisfaction. Additionally, nature exposure was correlated with less physical inactivity and fewer sleep disturbances. Evidence was mixed regarding associations between nature exposure and COVID-related health outcomes, while nature visits might be associated with greater rates of COVID-19 transmission and mortality when proper social distancing measures were not maintained. Findings on whether nature exposure during lockdowns helped ameliorate health inequities by impacting the health of lower-socioeconomic populations more than their higher-socioeconomic counterparts for example were mixed. Based on these findings, we argue that nature exposure may have buffered the negative mental and behavioral impacts of lockdowns during the COVID-19 pandemic. Recovery and resilience during the current crises and future public health crises might be improved with nature-based infrastructure, interventions, designs, and governance.

The PAD-US-AR dataset: Measuring accessible and recreational parks in the contiguous United States.

Most spatial epidemiological studies of nature-health relationships use generalized greenspace measures. For instance, coarse-resolution spatial data containing normalized difference vegetative index (NDVI) values are prominent despite criticisms, such as the inability to restrain exposure estimates to public and private land. Non-threatening natural landscapes can improve health by building capacities for health-promoting behaviors. Recreational and accessible parks may best activate such behaviors. We curated the Parks and Protected Areas Database of the U.S. (PAD-US) to identify parks that are accessible for outdoor recreation. Our title adds "AR" to "PAD-US" where A = Accessible and R = Recreational. We validated the PAD-US-AR by comparisons with greenspace datasets and sociodemographics, which demonstrated its uniqueness from other commonly employed metrics of nature exposure. The PAD-US-AR presents reliable estimates of parks in the contiguous U.S. that are accessible for outdoor recreation. It has strong associations with home prices, shares of female residents, and shares of older residents. This dataset can accompany other nature exposure metrics in environmental epidemiology and allied research fields.

Associations of parks, greenness, and blue space with cardiovascular and respiratory disease hospitalization in the US Medicare cohort.

Natural environments have been linked to decreased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and respiratory disease (RSD) mortality. However, few cohort studies have looked at associations of natural environments with CVD or RSD hospitalization. The aim of this study was to evaluate these associations in a cohort of U.S. Medicare beneficiaries (∼63 million individuals). Our open cohort included all fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries (2000-2016), aged ≥65, living in the contiguous U.S. We assessed zip code-level park cover based on the United States Geological Survey Protected Areas Database, average greenness (Normalized Difference Vegetation Index, NDVI), and percent blue space cover based on Landsat satellite images. Cox-equivalent Poisson models were used to estimate associations of the exposures with first CVD and RSD hospitalization in the full cohort and among those living in urban zip codes (≥1000 persons/mile2). NDVI was weakly negatively correlated with percent park cover (Spearman ρ = -0.23) and not correlated with percent blue space (Spearman ρ = 0.00). After adjustment for potential confounders, percent park cover was not associated with CVD or RSD hospitalization in the full or urban population. An IQR (0.27) increase in NDVI was negatively associated with CVD (HR: 0.97, 95%CI: 0.96, 0.97), but not with RSD hospitalization (HR: 0.99, 95%CI: 0.98, 1.00). In urban zip codes, an IQR increase in NDVI was positively associated with RSD hospitalization (HR: 1.02, 95%CI: 1.00, 1.03). In stratified analyses, percent park cover was negatively associated with CVD and RSD hospitalization for Medicaid eligible individuals and individuals living in low socioeconomic status neighborhoods in the urban population. We observed no associations of percent blue space cover with CVD or RSD hospitalization. This study suggests that natural environments may benefit cardiorespiratory health; however, benefits may be limited to certain contexts and certain health outcomes.

Associations of Greenness, Parks, and Blue Space With Neurodegenerative Disease Hospitalizations Among Older US Adults.

Importance: Exposure to natural environments has been associated with health outcomes related to neurological diseases. However, the few studies that have examined associations of natural environments with neurological diseases report mixed findings. Objective: To evaluate associations of natural environments with hospital admissions for Alzheimer disease and related dementias (ADRD) and Parkinson disease (PD) among older adults in the US. Design, Setting, and Participants: This open cohort study included fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years or older who lived in the contiguous US from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2016. Beneficiaries entered the cohort on January 1, 2000, or January 1 of the year after enrollment. Data from US Medicare enrollment and Medicare Provider Analysis and Review files, which contain information about individual-level covariates and all hospital admissions for Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries, were analyzed between January 2021 and September 2022. Exposures: Differences in IQRs for zip code-level greenness (normalized difference vegetation index [NDVI]), percentage park cover, and percentage blue space cover (surface water; ≥1.0% vs <1.0%). Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was first hospitalizations with a primary or secondary discharge diagnosis of ADRD or PD. To examine associations of exposures to natural environments with ADRD and PD hospitalization, we used Cox-equivalent Poisson models. Results: We included 61 662 472 and 61 673 367 Medicare beneficiaries in the ADRD and PD cohorts, respectively. For both cohorts, 55.2% of beneficiaries were women. Most beneficiaries in both cohorts were White (84.4%), were not eligible for Medicaid (87.6%), and were aged 65 to 74 years (76.6%) at study entry. We observed 7 737 609 and 1 168 940 first ADRD and PD hospitalizations, respectively. After adjustment for potential individual- and area-level confounders (eg, Medicaid eligibility and zip code-level median household income), NDVI was negatively associated with ADRD hospitalization (hazard ratio [HR], 0.95 [95% CI, 0.94-0.96], per IQR increase). We found no evidence of an association of percentage park and blue space cover with ADRD hospitalization. In contrast, NDVI (HR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.93-0.95], per IQR increase), percentage park cover (HR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.97-0.98], per IQR increase), and blue space cover (HR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.96-0.98], ≥1.0% vs <1.0%) were associated with a decrease in PD hospitalizations. Patterns of effect modification by demographics differed between exposures. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cohort study suggest that some natural environments are associated with a decreased risk of ADRD and PD hospitalization.

Correction: Psychological impacts from COVID-19 among university students: Risk factors across seven states in the United States.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0245327.].

Green Gentrification and Health: A Scoping Review.

Urban greening initiatives are often linked to enhanced human health and wellbeing, but they can also be a driver of gentrification. To date, few studies have focused on how green gentrification shapes health. In this scoping review, we analyzed existing peer-reviewed research on how greening initiatives in gentrifying neighborhoods impact health, well-being, and health pathways (e.g., physical activity, affordable housing). Using a multi-step approach to scoping the literature (including searches in PubMed, JSTOR, and Google Scholar), we identified 15 empirical studies that met our inclusion criteria. We found studies focusing on green space use, physical activity, sense of community, safety, and self-reported health. Overall, longtime, marginalized residents are negatively impacted by green gentrification as they experience a lower sense of community, feel that they do not belong in green space, and, in many studies, use green space less often than newcomers. Overall, the research in this area is limited, and more studies on mental health and cardiovascular health markers could advance this literature. Based on the limited available evidence, we suggest that public health, urban planning, and parks professionals could collaborate to enhance the use of green space for marginalized residents and their feelings of inclusion in gentrifying areas.

Green Space and Health Equity: A Systematic Review on the Potential of Green Space to Reduce Health Disparities.

Disadvantaged groups worldwide, such as low-income and racially/ethnically minoritized people, experience worse health outcomes than more privileged groups, including wealthier and white people. Such health disparities are a major public health issue in several countries around the world. In this systematic review, we examine whether green space shows stronger associations with physical health for disadvantaged groups than for privileged groups. We hypothesize that disadvantaged groups have stronger protective effects from green space because of their greater dependency on proximate green space, as they tend to lack access to other health-promoting resources. We use the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) method and search five databases (CINAHL, Cochrane, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science) to look for articles that examine whether socioeconomic status (SES) or race/ethnicity modify the green space-health associations. Based on this search, we identify 90 articles meeting our inclusion criteria. We find lower-SES people show more beneficial effects than affluent people, particularly when concerning public green spaces/parks rather than green land covers/greenness. Studies in Europe show stronger protective effects for lower-SES people versus higher-SES people than do studies in North America. We find no notable differences in the protective effects of green space between racial/ethnic groups. Collectively, these results suggest green space might be a tool to advance health equity and provide ways forward for urban planners, parks managers, and public health professionals to address health disparities.

Psychological impacts from COVID-19 among university students: Risk factors across seven states in the United States.

BACKGROUND: University students are increasingly recognized as a vulnerable population, suffering from higher levels of anxiety, depression, substance abuse, and disordered eating compared to the general population. Therefore, when the nature of their educational experience radically changes-such as sheltering in place during the COVID-19 pandemic-the burden on the mental health of this vulnerable population is amplified. The objectives of this study are to 1) identify the array of psychological impacts COVID-19 has on students, 2) develop profiles to characterize students' anticipated levels of psychological impact during the pandemic, and 3) evaluate potential sociodemographic, lifestyle-related, and awareness of people infected with COVID-19 risk factors that could make students more likely to experience these impacts. METHODS: Cross-sectional data were collected through web-based questionnaires from seven U.S. universities. Representative and convenience sampling was used to invite students to complete the questionnaires in mid-March to early-May 2020, when most coronavirus-related sheltering in place orders were in effect. We received 2,534 completed responses, of which 61% were from women, 79% from non-Hispanic Whites, and 20% from graduate students. RESULTS: Exploratory factor analysis on close-ended responses resulted in two latent constructs, which we used to identify profiles of students with latent profile analysis, including high (45% of sample), moderate (40%), and low (14%) levels of psychological impact. Bivariate associations showed students who were women, were non-Hispanic Asian, in fair/poor health, of below-average relative family income, or who knew someone infected with COVID-19 experienced higher levels of psychological impact. Students who were non-Hispanic White, above-average social class, spent at least two hours outside, or less than eight hours on electronic screens were likely to experience lower levels of psychological impact. Multivariate modeling (mixed-effects logistic regression) showed that being a woman, having fair/poor general health status, being 18 to 24 years old, spending 8 or more hours on screens daily, and knowing someone infected predicted higher levels of psychological impact when risk factors were considered simultaneously. CONCLUSION: Inadequate efforts to recognize and address college students' mental health challenges, especially during a pandemic, could have long-term consequences on their health and education.

Noncommunicable Diseases, Park Prescriptions, and Urban Green Space Use Patterns in a Global South Context: The Case of Dhaka, Bangladesh.

Urban green space use is often associated with improved physical and mental health and lower noncommunicable disease (NCDs) burdens. Factors that influence green space visits have been documented in cities of the Global North, but evidence of urban green space use patterns for cities in the Global South is scarce. The aim of this study is to investigate factors influencing urban green space use patterns in Dhaka, Bangladesh, a megacity of the Global South, with a particular focus on how poor health condition and healthcare professionals' prescriptions to exercise outdoors (park prescriptions-ParkRx) impact the green space use of middle-aged adults. We collected green space characteristics and use factors (i.e., availability, accessibility, attractiveness, and attachment), health condition, ParkRx, and urban green space use intensity (i.e., frequency and duration) via a self-reported questionnaire from 169 middle-aged residents of Dhaka. We used multivariate modeling to estimate the association of green space characteristics, health condition, and ParkRx with use intensity. We further applied a mediation analysis to determine the influence of ParkRx on the relationship between residents' poor health conditions and use intensity. We found that green space availability and accessibility did not significantly influence use intensity, but attractiveness was negatively associated with use intensity. Green space use intensity was significantly and positively associated with attachment to the green space, poor health condition (i.e., having noncommunicable diseases), and ParkRx. ParkRx significantly mediated the relationship between health condition and use intensity. We observed limited supply, poor access, and low attractiveness when studying the urban green spaces in Dhaka, but these qualities did not affect use intensity, as found in many case studies in the Global North. In contrast, urban green space use intensity in our case study is mostly dependent on poor health condition and park prescriptions.

School Green Space and Its Impact on Academic Performance: A Systematic Literature Review.

Background: Scholars and policymakers have criticized public education in developed countries for perpetuating health and income disparities. Several studies have examined the ties between green space and academic performance, hypothesizing that green space can foster performance, and, over time, help reduce such disparities. Although numerous reviews have analyzed the link between nature and child health, none have focused on academic achievement. Methods: We identified 13 peer-reviewed articles that examined associations between academic outcomes, types of green spaces, and distances in which green spaces were measured around schools. Results: Of the 122 findings reported in the 13 articles, 64% were non-significant, 8% were significant and negative, and 28% were significant and positive. Positive findings were limited to greenness, tree cover, and green land cover at distances up to 2000 m around schools. End-of-semester grades and college preparatory exams showed greater shares of positive associations than math or reading test scores. Most findings regarding writing test scores were non-significant, and moderation effects of socioeconomic status, gender, and urbanization showed mixed results. Conclusions: The extant literature on green space and academic performance is small, shows mixed results, and mostly includes articles using observational, school-level research designs. Regardless, there is sufficient evidence to warrant further research on this topic, including effect moderation and mechanistic pathways.