MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4404524872 · doi:10.56031/2576-215x.1072

Nature Healing Mental Stress: What U.S. Healthcare Can Learn from Other Nations

2024· article· en· W4404524872 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shannon Frank-Richter, Lindsay Gietzen

Bibliographic record

VenuePacific Journal of Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate Change and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthcareMental healthMental health careStress (linguistics)Health carePsychologyNursingPolitical sciencePsychotherapistMedicinePhilosophyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The United States healthcare system lags many developed nations in healthcare access and practices, especially surrounding ecotherapy [1]. Ecotherapy is the practice of mindfulness in tandem with intentional immersion among natural spaces or with natural elements. Research from Asia, Europe and Canada indicate immense benefits from ecotherapy, or mindful nature immersion, as an effective treatment for burnout and stress. By adopting regular nature engagement, the U.S. could significantly improve mental health and reduce occupational stress. This literature review examines how nature immersion, especially with mindfulness, positively affects the brain and nervous system. Key components in nature are identified, such as negative ions, phytoncides, and fractal structures that specifically enhance cognitive, mental, and emotional health. Research suggests that practicing mindfulness in nature for at least 120 minutes weekly maximizes these benefits, highlighting the need for ecotherapy recognition in U.S. healthcare [2].

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.002

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePacific Journal of Health→Same topicClimate Change and Health Impacts→French-language works237,207→