Cited by 148Urban Green Space and HealthUrban Arborization and Environmental StudiesEnvironmental Justice and Health Disparities

Lifelong Residential Exposure to Green Space and Attention: A Population-based Prospective Study

Open access
Dadvand, Payam, Tischer, Christina, Estarlich, Marisa, Llop, Sabrina, Dalmau-Bueno, Albert, López-Vicente, Monica, Valentín, Antònia, de Keijzer, Carmen +11 more·2017·Environmental Health Perspectives

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Natural environments, including green spaces, may have beneficial impacts on brain development. However, longitudinal evidence of an association between long-term exposure to green spaces and cognitive development (including attention) in children is limited. OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the association between lifelong residential exposure to green space and attention during preschool and early primary school years. METHODS: This longitudinal study was based on data from two well-established population-based birth cohorts in Spain. We assessed lifelong exposure to residential surrounding greenness and tree cover as the average of satellite-based normalized difference vegetation index and vegetation continuous fields, respectively, surrounding the child's residential addresses at birth, 4-5 y, and 7 y. Attention was characterized using two computer-based tests: Conners' Kiddie Continuous Performance Test (K-CPT) at 4-5 y (n=888) and Attentional Network Task (ANT) at 7 y (n=987). We used adjusted mixed effects models with cohort random effects to estimate associations between exposure to greenness and attention at ages 4-5 and 7 y. RESULTS: Higher lifelong residential surrounding greenness was associated with fewer K-CPT omission errors and lower K-CPT hit reaction time-standard error (HRT-SE) at 4-5 y and lower ANT HRT-SE at 7 y, consistent with better attention. This exposure was not associated with K-CPT commission errors or with ANT omission or commission errors. Associations with residential surrounding tree cover also were close to the null, or were negative (for ANT HRT-SE) but not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Exposure to residential surrounding greenness was associated with better scores on tests of attention at 4-5 y and 7 y of age in our longitudinal cohort. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP694.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1289/ehp694

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Fourteen studies identified in this systematic scoping review measured both ST and GT.

    “Fourteen studies identified in this systematic scoping review measured both ST and GT [234–238, 242–250].”

    From Psychological impacts of “screen time” and “green time” for children and adolescents: A systematic scoping review (2020) · cites this paper as [234]

    The Materials and Methods sections on Residential Surrounding Greenness and Assessment of Attention describe satellite-based greenness measures and computerized attention tests, not measurements of both ST and GT. Searches for screen time, outdoor time, and related activities found no passage establishing that this study measured both. The cited paper also cannot verify the scoping review’s count of fourteen studies. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 49 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Kaplan R, Kaplan S 1989 The experience of nature: a psychological perspective. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  2. Wilson EO 1984 Biophilia. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dadvand, P., Tischer, C., Estarlich, M., Llop, S., Dalmau-Bueno, A., López-Vicente, M., Valentín, A., de Keijzer, C., Fernández-Somoano, A., Lertxundi, N., Rodriguez-Dehli, C., Gascon, M., Guxens, M., Zugna, D., Basagaña, X., Nieuwenhuijsen, M. J., Ibarluzea, J., Ballester, F., & Sunyer, J.
Affiliations
  • Universitat Pompeu Fabra (ES)
  • Universitat Jaume I (ES)
  • ISGlobal, CREAL (Centre for Research in Environmental Epidemiology), Barcelona, Spain
  • CIBERESP (Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red Epidemiología y Salud Pública), Madrid, Spain
  • University of the Basque Country (ES)
  • Servicio de Pediatría, Hospital San Agustín, Avilés, Spain
  • Piedmont Reference Center for Epidemiology and Cancer Prevention (IT)
Corresponding author
Dadvand, Payam
Venue
Environmental Health Perspectives
Published
2017-09-22
Volume
125
Issue
9
Pages
097016-097016
ISSN
  • 0091-6765 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-9924
OpenAlex
W2757307492
Cited by
148
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 27 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 9
FWCI
7.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
public-domain
Locations
  • Environmental Health Perspectives (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • RECERCAT (Consorci de Serveis Universitaris de Catalunya) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Institutional Research Information System University of Turin (University of Turin) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Research Bank (Australian Catholic University) (submittedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • RePub (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Consultation of the Doctoral Thesis Database (TESEO) (Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Dipòsit Digital de la Universitat de Barcelona (Universitat de Barcelona) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Repositori digital de la UPF (Universitat Pompeu Fabra) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • European Respiratory Society
  • Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad (MS13/00054, RYC-2012-10995)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Urban Green Space and Health
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Urban Arborization and Environmental Studies
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Environmental Justice and Health Disparities
Keywords
residential green space, attention, tree cover, NDVI, preschool children, early primary school children, cognitive development, attentional networks, reaction time, birth cohort
MeSH terms
Attention, Child, Child, Preschool, Environmental Exposure, Female, Humans, Male, Prospective Studies

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