MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323295586 · doi:10.1038/s41598-023-28544-w

Applying an ecosystem services framework on nature and mental health to recreational blue space visits across 18 countries

2023· article· en· W4323295586 on OpenAlexaff
Joanne K. Garrett, Mathew P. White, Lewis R. Elliott, James Grellier, Simon Bell, Gregory N. Bratman, Theo Economou, Mireia Gascón, Mare Lõhmus, Mark Nieuwenhuijsen, Ann Ojala, Anne Roiko, Matilda van den Bosch, Catharine Ward Thompson, Lora E. Fleming

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Green Space and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchMinisterio de Ciencia e InnovaciónGeneralitat de CatalunyaUniversity of the Sunshine CoastHorizon 2020Medical Research CouncilEnvironmental Protection AgencyEuropean CommissionUniversity of ExeterInstituto de Salud Carlos IIIGriffith UniversityCentres de Recerca de Catalunya
KeywordsRecreationEcosystem servicesMental healthContext (archaeology)Conceptual modelConceptual frameworkEcosystemAffect (linguistics)Environmental resource managementQuality (philosophy)Environmental qualityPsychologyApplied psychologyGeographyEnvironmental healthBusinessEcologyComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceMedicinePsychiatrySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effects of 'nature' on mental health and subjective well-being have yet to be consistently integrated into ecosystem service models and frameworks. To address this gap, we used data on subjective mental well-being from an 18-country survey to test a conceptual model integrating mental health with ecosystem services, initially proposed by Bratman et al. We analysed a range of individual and contextual factors in the context of 14,998 recreational visits to blue spaces, outdoor environments which prominently feature water. Consistent with the conceptual model, subjective mental well-being outcomes were dependent upon on a complex interplay of environmental type and quality, visit characteristics, and individual factors. These results have implications for public health and environmental management, as they may help identify the bluespace locations, environmental features, and key activities, that are most likely to impact well-being, but also potentially affect recreational demand on fragile aquatic ecosystems.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.638
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.296 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations51
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicUrban Green Space and HealthFrench-language works237,207