A Diagnostic Post-Occupancy Evaluation of the Nacadia® Therapy Garden
Open accessAbstract
The design of the Nacadia® therapy garden is based on a model for evidence-based health design in landscape architecture (EBHDL). One element of the model is a diagnostic post-occupancy evaluation (DPOE), which has not previously been fully developed. The present study develops a generic DPOE for therapy gardens, with a focus on studying the effects of the design on patients’ health outcomes. This is done in order to identify successes and failures in the design. By means of a triangulation approach, the DPOE employs a mixture of methods, and data is interpreted corroborating. The aim of the present study is to apply the DPOE to the Nacadia® therapy garden. The results of the DPOE suggest that the design of the Nacadia® therapy garden fulfills its stated aims and objectives. The overall environment of the Nacadia ® therapy garden was experienced as protective and safe, and successfully incorporated the various elements of the nature-based therapy programme. The participants encountered meaningful spaces and activities which suited their current physical and mental capabilities, and the health outcome measured by EQ-VAS (self-estimated general health) indicated a significant increase. Some design failures were identified, of which visual exposure was the most noteworthy. The DPOE model presented appears to be efficient but would nonetheless profit from being validated by other cases.
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.
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 25 · Cited by 38
- Authors
- Sidenius, U., Karlsson Nyed, P., Linn Lygum, V., & K. Stigsdotter, U.
- Affiliations
- University of Copenhagen (DK)
- Section for Landscape Architecture and Planning, Department of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management, University of Copenhagen, 1958 Frederiksberg, Denmark
- Corresponding author
- Sidenius, Ulrik
- Venue
- International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
- Publisher
- MDPI AG
- Published
- 2017-08-05
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 882
- ISSN
- 1660-4601 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC5580586
- OpenAlex
- W2744349718
- Cited by
- 38
- References
- 25
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2
- FWCI
- 0.44
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- VBN Forskningsportal (Aalborg Universitet) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- TrygFonden
- 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 › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Occupational Therapy Practice and Research
- Keywords
- landscape architecture, nature therapy, patient outcomes, perceived safety, visual exposure, self-rated health, design evaluation
- MeSH terms
- Gardens, Adult, Environment, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Stress, Psychological, Treatment Outcome, Young Adult
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