4.3 Review

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Associations between Green and Blue Spaces and Birth Outcomes

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17082949

关键词

green space; blue space; pregnancy outcomes; health benefits; urban planning

资金

  1. Hort Innovation Limited
  2. University of Wollongong (UOW) Faculty of Social Sciences [GC15005]
  3. UOW Global Challenges initiative [GC15005]
  4. Australian Government [GC15005]
  5. National Health and Medical Research Council [1148792, 1101065, 1140317]
  6. National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia [1148792, 1140317] Funding Source: NHMRC

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Previous studies suggest that green and blue spaces may promote several health outcomes including birth outcomes. However, no synthesis of previous work has specifically asked policy-relevant questions of how much and what type is needed in every neighborhood to elicit these benefits at the population level. A systematic review and meta-analyses were conducted to synthesize thirty-seven studies on the association between residential green and blue spaces and pregnancy outcomes. Meta-analyses were performed for birth weight (BW), small for gestational age (SGA), low birth weight (LBW) and preterm birth (PTB). Increase in residential greenness was statistically significantly associated with higher BW [beta = 0.001, 95%CI: (<0.001, 0.002)] and lower odds of SGA [OR = 0.95, 95%CI: (0.92, 0.97)]. Associations between green space and LBW and PTB were as hypothesized but not statistically significant. Associations between blue spaces and pregnancy outcomes were not evident. No study explicitly examined questions of threshold, though some evidence of nonlinearity indicated that moderate amounts of green space may support more favorable pregnancy outcomes. Policy-relevant green and blue space exposures involving theory-driven thresholds warrant testing to ensure future investments in urban greening promote healthier pregnancy outcomes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据