MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4411871454 · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-05047-4

Investigating biological sex as a moderator of the association of nature exposure with brain health: a cross-sectional UK biobank analysis

2025· article· en· W4411871454 on OpenAlexaff
Matt W Noseworthy, Ryan S. Falck, Liisa A.M. Galea, Todd C. Handy, Teresa Liu‐Ambrose

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate Change and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia HospitalMental Health Research CanadaUniversity of TorontoVancouver Coastal HealthVancouver Coastal Health Research InstituteUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiobankCross-sectional studyModerationAssociation (psychology)MedicineEnvironmental healthPsychologyGerontologyDemographyBiologyBioinformaticsPathologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this cross-sectional analysis of the UK Biobank, we investigated whether biological sex moderates the association of residential nature exposure with brain volume or cognitive function. We included 11,448 cognitively healthy UK residents aged 37–73 years (98% White; 51% female). Residential nature exposure was estimated as the percentage of land classified as natural environment within 1000 m and 300 m buffers around each participant’s home. Structural brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) outcomes included total grey matter volume, total white matter volume, and average hippocampal volume, all normalized for head size. Cognitive function was assessed with the Trail Making Test (B-A) and the Symbol Digit Substituton Test. In linear regression models, higher residential nature exposure at both buffer sizes was associated with greater grey matter volume (1000 m: β = 629 mm 3 per 10% increment in nature exposure; 95% CI: 234 to 1023; p = 0.002; 300 m: β = 642 mm 3 ; 95% CI: 286 to 997; p < 0.001), greater white matter volume (1000 m: 659 mm 3 ; 95% CI: 229 to 1089; p = 0.003; 300 m: β = 527 mm 3 ; 95% CI: 140 to 914; p = 0.008), and more correct matches on the Symbol Digit Substituton Test (1000 m: β = 0.106 matches; 95% CI: 0.057 to 0.154; p < 0.001; 300 m: β = 0.049 matches; 95% CI: 0.006 to 0.092; p = 0.03). In males, compared with females, higher nature exposure was associated with a greater increment in grey matter volume (1000 m; β = 635 mm 3 ; 95% CI: 53 to 1217; p = 0.03; 300 m: β = 634 mm 3 ; 95% CI: 102 to 1167; p = 0.02), and with a greater reduction in Trail-Making Test B-A time (300 m only: β = 0.284 s; 95% CI: 0.016 to 0.551; p = 0.04). These sex differences showed some sensitivity to participant residence changes and to type of nature exposure measure. Residential nature exposure may support brain volume and cognitive function, and some of the potential benefits may vary by sex.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.300 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicClimate Change and Health Impacts→French-language works237,207→