Mental well-being and quality-of-life benefits of inclusion in nature for adults with disabilities and their caregivers
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The benefits of green space and nature experiences are increasingly being recognised and translated into public health policy and practice. Alongside this trend, inclusion of all people into parks and nature has been an important area of parks and recreation practice. Nature inclusion for those with disabilities, youth, seniors and immigrants has become a focus of Alberta in Western Canada. This study was designed to examine the influence of two such government supported nature interventions, including day trips and a more extensive weekend or week-long nature experience, on mental well-being outcomes. It is a mixed methods pilot study (N = 37) with baseline and post-intervention measures of quality of life using the standard Quality of Life Inventory (QOLI) alongside other qualitative accounts. Quantitative findings, while not statistically significant, show a positive trend towards improved depression markers, greater health satisfaction, improved social relationships (in particular, love and friendship), as well as satisfaction with a sense of community and experiences of helping. In addition to comments within the QOLI, qualitative data were elicited through reflective writing during the nature interventions. Three dominant qualitative themes of inclusive nature experiences were found: ‘Sensory Activation’, ‘Reimagined Social Relations’ and ‘Reinvented Self’.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it