MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391352993 · doi:10.1177/19375867231221559

The Influence of Exposure to Nature on Inpatient Hospital Stays: A Scoping Review

2024· review· en· W4391352993 on OpenAlex
Keegan Guidolin, Flora Jung, Sarah B. Hunter, Han Yan, Marina Englesakis, Stephen Verderber, Sami A. Chadi, Fayez A. Quereshy

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHERD Health Environments Research & Design Journal · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Green Space and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNatural (archaeology)AnxietyTherapeutic windowPsychologyNarrativeHealth careThematic analysisWindow (computing)MedicineApplied psychologyQualitative researchComputer scienceHistoryPsychiatrySociologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: To summarize the existing literature surrounding the influence of natural elements on course in hospital and to introduce clinicians to the concept of biophilic design and the potential for incorporation of nature into the hospital environment as a component of a therapeutic hospitalization. BACKGROUND: For decades, architects and designers have espoused the benefits of incorporating natural elements into the healthcare environment for therapeutic purposes. The benefits of this "biophilic" design philosophy has been investigated predominantly in long-term care or rehabilitation settings; however, some of the most appealing opportunities lie in the acute care setting. METHODS: This scoping review surveyed the literature surrounding the influence of exposure to nature on course in acute hospitalizations. After screening 12,979 citations, 41 articles were included. Exposures were divided into seven categories, the most common of which were the presence of a window/natural light, a natural scene through a window, and nature soundscapes. These articles were reviewed in a narrative fashion and thematic analysis was conducted. RESULTS: Studies were extremely heterogeneous in their design, research questions, and reported outcomes. Types of exposure to nature studied were exposure to a real natural scene through a window, presence of a window/nature light, nature in the healthcare environment, art depicting nature, direct contact with nature, nature soundscapes, and nature experienced through virtual reality (VR). CONCLUSIONS: Exposure to nature during an acute hospital admission appears to have a real but small therapeutic effect, predominantly on psychological metrics like anxiety/depression, pain, and patient satisfaction. Greater beneficial effects are seen with greater durations of exposure to nature and greater degrees of immersion into nature (e.g., creating multisensory experiences using emerging technology like VR).

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 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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.787
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.003

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 head0.129
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.336 · 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