Nature-Based Design in Stroke Rehabilitation Environments: A Scoping Review
Open accessAbstract
Objective: To identify, examine, and map the characteristics of knowledge of nature-based design in stroke rehabilitation facilities, examine how research in this field has been conducted and identify gaps in knowledge. Background: Many stroke survivors have wide ranging impacts, resulting in long hospital stays to undertake rehabilitation. The physical environment can influence brain recovery; however, there is limited evidence to support the design of effective rehabilitation environments. Conversely, the health benefits available from connection with nature are well established. A nature-based design approach may have benefits and implications for the physical environment of inpatient stroke rehabilitation facilities; however, it is unclear what evidence exists in this field. Method: This scoping review followed the JBI methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews, with systematic searches of six databases. Results: Twenty-eight studies were included in the review. Aims and research methods varied widely. Investigations in 19 studies related to gardens and other designed outdoor nature-based environments. Other studies explored natural analogues, nature inside, inside/outside connections, and the natural environment. Findings from the studies were spread across the fields of design, use, exposure to, and engagement in nature-based environments. Conclusion: The characteristics of knowledge underpinning nature-based design in stroke rehabilitation environments are highly diverse, and significant gaps exist in the evidence base. A framework developed during this review for mapping knowledge on the intentions and impacts for spaces and services in this field assisted to identify these gaps and may be applied to other areas of healthcare design research.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Munn, Z., Peters, M. D. J., Stern, C., Tufanaru, C., McArthur, A., & Aromataris, E. (2018) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x · Cited by 11,385 · cited 1× · see citing works
“A scoping review is useful for emerging research areas with unclear evidence to identify and map the existing scope, examine how research has been conducted, and identify gaps in knowledge (Munn et al., 2018).”
Depression, Anxiety, and Suicide After Stroke: A Narrative Review of the Best Available Evidence
Chun, H.-Y. Y., Ford, A., Kutlubaev, M. A., Almeida, O. P., & Mead, G. E. (2022) · Stroke · doi:10.1161/strokeaha.121.035499 · Cited by 150 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Researchers have shown depression is common poststroke (Chun et al., 2022) and many patients in rehabilitation experience significant periods of inactivity (Sjo¨holm et al., 2014), boredom, and low stimulation (Kenah et al., 2022; Luker et al., 2015), which may hinder their progress.”
Flagged first, then by citations
- Authors
- Seale, B., Davis, A., Lawson, J., Smith, L., Watson, J., & Henderson-Wilson, C.
- Affiliations
- Deakin University (AU)
- University of South Australia (AU)
- Health Nature & Sustainability Research Group, School of Health and Social Development, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Burwood, Victoria, Australia
- Corresponding author
- Seale, Belinda
- Venue
- HERD: Health Environments Research & Design Journal
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2024-05-14
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 186-211
- ISSN
- 1937-5867 (ISSN-L)
- 2167-5112
- PMC
- PMC11608514
- OpenAlex
- W4396893686
- Cited by
- 10
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 1
- FWCI
- 0.43
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- HERD Health Environments Research & Design Journal (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- UniSA Research Outputs Repository (University of South Australia) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Adelaide Research & Scholarship (AR&S) (University of Adelaide) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Urban Green Space and Health
- Social Sciences › Urban Studies › Healthcare Facilities Design and Sustainability
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
- Keywords
- nature-based design, stroke rehabilitation, healthcare environment design, gardens, natural analogues, indoor-outdoor connection, nature exposure, stroke survivors, inpatient rehabilitation facilities, knowledge gaps
- MeSH terms
- Stroke Rehabilitation, Gardens, Environment Design, Facility Design and Construction, Humans, Rehabilitation Centers, Nature
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review