The contribution of environmental science to mental health research: A scoping review

Michaela Roberts; Kathryn Colley; Margaret Currie; Antonia Eastwood; Kuang-Heng Li; Lisa M Avery; Lindsay C Beevers; Isobel Braithwaite; Martin Dallimere; Zoe G Davies; Helen Fisher; Christopher J Gidlow; Anjum Memon; Ian S Mudway; Larissa A Naylor; Stefan  Reis; Pete Smith; Stephen A Stansfeld; Stephanie Wilkie; Katherine N  Irvine

doi:10.3390/ijerph20075278

The contribution of environmental science to mental health research: A scoping review

Michaela Roberts, Kathryn Colley, Margaret Currie, Antonia Eastwood, Kuang-Heng Li, Lisa M Avery, Lindsay C Beevers, Isobel Braithwaite, Martin Dallimere, Zoe G Davies, Helen Fisher, Christopher J Gidlow, Anjum Memon, Ian S Mudway, Larissa A Naylor, Stefan Reis, Pete Smith, Stephen A Stansfeld, Stephanie Wilkie, Katherine N Irvine^*

^*Corresponding author for this work

Social Genetic & Developmental Psychiatry

Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article › peer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Mental health is influenced by multiple complex and interacting genetic, psychological, social, and environmental factors. As such, developing state-of-the-art mental health knowledge requires collaboration across academic disciplines, including environmental science. To assess the current contribution of environmental science to this field, a scoping review of the literature on environmental influences on mental health (including conditions of cognitive development and decline) was conducted. The review protocol was developed in consultation with experts working across mental health and environmental science. The scoping review included 202 English-language papers, published between 2010 and 2020 (prior to the COVID-19 pandemic), on environmental themes that had not already been the subject of recent systematic reviews; 26 reviews on climate change, flooding, air pollution, and urban green space were additionally considered. Studies largely focused on populations in the USA, China, or Europe and involved limited environmental science input. Environmental science research methods are primarily focused on quantitative approaches utilising secondary datasets or field data. Mental health measurement was dominated by the use of self-report psychometric scales. Measures of environmental states or exposures were often lacking in specificity (e.g., limited to the presence or absence of an environmental state). Based on the scoping review findings and our synthesis of the recent reviews, a research agenda for environmental science's future contribution to mental health scholarship is set out. This includes recommendations to expand the geographical scope and broaden the representation of different environmental science areas, improve measurement of environmental exposure, prioritise experimental and longitudinal research designs, and giving greater consideration to variation between and within communities and the mediating pathways by which environment influences mental health. There is also considerable opportunity to increase interdisciplinarity within the field via the integration of conceptual models, the inclusion of mixed methods and qualitative approaches, as well as further consideration of the socio-political context and the environmental states that can help support good mental health. The findings were used to propose a conceptual model to parse contributions and connections between environmental science and mental health to inform future studies.

Original language	English
Article number	5278
Journal	International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
Volume	20
Issue number	7
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20075278
Publication status	Published - 27 Mar 2023

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.3390/ijerph20075278Licence: CC BY

Cite this

Roberts, M., Colley, K., Currie, M., Eastwood, A., Li, K-H., Avery, L. M., Beevers, L. C., Braithwaite, I., Dallimere, M., Davies, Z. G., Fisher, H., Gidlow, C. J., Memon, A., Mudway, I. S., Naylor, L. A., Reis, S., Smith, P., Stansfeld, S. A., Wilkie, S., & Irvine, K. N. (2023). The contribution of environmental science to mental health research: A scoping review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(7), [5278]. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20075278

@article{a295d1f0e5c4416ba16ead27bdc2884e,

title = "The contribution of environmental science to mental health research: A scoping review",

abstract = "Mental health is influenced by multiple complex and interacting genetic, psychological, social, and environmental factors. As such, developing state-of-the-art mental health knowledge requires collaboration across academic disciplines, including environmental science. To assess the current contribution of environmental science to this field, a scoping review of the literature on environmental influences on mental health (including conditions of cognitive development and decline) was conducted. The review protocol was developed in consultation with experts working across mental health and environmental science. The scoping review included 202 English-language papers, published between 2010 and 2020 (prior to the COVID-19 pandemic), on environmental themes that had not already been the subject of recent systematic reviews; 26 reviews on climate change, flooding, air pollution, and urban green space were additionally considered. Studies largely focused on populations in the USA, China, or Europe and involved limited environmental science input. Environmental science research methods are primarily focused on quantitative approaches utilising secondary datasets or field data. Mental health measurement was dominated by the use of self-report psychometric scales. Measures of environmental states or exposures were often lacking in specificity (e.g., limited to the presence or absence of an environmental state). Based on the scoping review findings and our synthesis of the recent reviews, a research agenda for environmental science's future contribution to mental health scholarship is set out. This includes recommendations to expand the geographical scope and broaden the representation of different environmental science areas, improve measurement of environmental exposure, prioritise experimental and longitudinal research designs, and giving greater consideration to variation between and within communities and the mediating pathways by which environment influences mental health. There is also considerable opportunity to increase interdisciplinarity within the field via the integration of conceptual models, the inclusion of mixed methods and qualitative approaches, as well as further consideration of the socio-political context and the environmental states that can help support good mental health. The findings were used to propose a conceptual model to parse contributions and connections between environmental science and mental health to inform future studies.",

author = "Michaela Roberts and Kathryn Colley and Margaret Currie and Antonia Eastwood and Kuang-Heng Li and Avery, {Lisa M} and Beevers, {Lindsay C} and Isobel Braithwaite and Martin Dallimere and Davies, {Zoe G} and Helen Fisher and Gidlow, {Christopher J} and Anjum Memon and Mudway, {Ian S} and Naylor, {Larissa A} and Stefan Reis and Pete Smith and Stansfeld, {Stephen A} and Stephanie Wilkie and Irvine, {Katherine N}",

note = "Funding Information: This scoping review was funded through a project commissioned by the UK{\textquoteright}s Natural Environment Research Council (NERC; NE/M005410/2), as part of UK Research and Innovation (UKRI), and managed under the Valuing Nature Programme. The funders commented on an initial draft of the study protocol but had no role in data collection and analysis, decision on where to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Manuscript development and publication was further supported by Scottish Government Rural and Environment Science and Analytical Services Division, Strategic Research Programmes 2016–2121 (RD3.4.3 Landscapes and Wellbeing) and 2022–2027 (JHI-C6: Reciprocal Care for Nature and Wellbeing; JHI-D4-1: People and Nature). The contribution of L.M.A. was supported by the Scottish Government Rural and Environment Science and Analytical Services Division, Strategic Research Programme 2016-21 (Theme 2: Sustainable Land Management and Rural Economies). L.B. was funded by UKRI Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council Water Resilient Cities project (grant number EP/N030419/1). I.B. was supported by a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Academic Clinical Fellowship and a Doctoral Clinical Fellowship (DRF no. 302216). M.D. and Z.G.D. were funded by the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union{\textquoteright}s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (Consolidator Grant No. 726104). H.L.F. was supported by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) Centre for Society and Mental Health at King{\textquoteright}s College London (ES/S012567/1). I.S.M. was supported by the NIHR Health Protection Research Units in Environmental Exposures and Health, and Chemical and Radiation Threats and Hazards, a partnership between the UK Health Security Agency and Imperial College London. L.A.N. was supported by NERC (NE/R009236/1). The work of S.R. was supported by NERC award number NE/R016429/1 as part of the UK-SCAPE programme delivering National Capability. The views, interpretations, and conclusions in the article are those of the authors and not necessarily those of NERC or other funders supporting author{\textquoteright}s involvement or entities with whom authors are affiliated. Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2023 by the authors.",

year = "2023",

month = mar,

day = "27",

doi = "10.3390/ijerph20075278",

language = "English",

volume = "20",

journal = "International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health",

issn = "1660-4601",

publisher = "Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI)",

number = "7",

}

Roberts, M, Colley, K, Currie, M, Eastwood, A, Li, K-H, Avery, LM, Beevers, LC, Braithwaite, I, Dallimere, M, Davies, ZG, Fisher, H, Gidlow, CJ, Memon, A, Mudway, IS, Naylor, LA, Reis, S, Smith, P, Stansfeld, SA, Wilkie, S & Irvine, KN 2023, 'The contribution of environmental science to mental health research: A scoping review', International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 20, no. 7, 5278. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20075278

TY - JOUR

T1 - The contribution of environmental science to mental health research: A scoping review

AU - Roberts, Michaela

AU - Colley, Kathryn

AU - Currie, Margaret

AU - Eastwood, Antonia

AU - Li, Kuang-Heng

AU - Avery, Lisa M

AU - Beevers, Lindsay C

AU - Braithwaite, Isobel

AU - Dallimere, Martin

AU - Davies, Zoe G

AU - Fisher, Helen

AU - Gidlow, Christopher J

AU - Memon, Anjum

AU - Mudway, Ian S

AU - Naylor, Larissa A

AU - Reis, Stefan

AU - Smith, Pete

AU - Stansfeld, Stephen A

AU - Wilkie, Stephanie

AU - Irvine, Katherine N

N1 - Funding Information: This scoping review was funded through a project commissioned by the UK’s Natural Environment Research Council (NERC; NE/M005410/2), as part of UK Research and Innovation (UKRI), and managed under the Valuing Nature Programme. The funders commented on an initial draft of the study protocol but had no role in data collection and analysis, decision on where to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Manuscript development and publication was further supported by Scottish Government Rural and Environment Science and Analytical Services Division, Strategic Research Programmes 2016–2121 (RD3.4.3 Landscapes and Wellbeing) and 2022–2027 (JHI-C6: Reciprocal Care for Nature and Wellbeing; JHI-D4-1: People and Nature). The contribution of L.M.A. was supported by the Scottish Government Rural and Environment Science and Analytical Services Division, Strategic Research Programme 2016-21 (Theme 2: Sustainable Land Management and Rural Economies). L.B. was funded by UKRI Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council Water Resilient Cities project (grant number EP/N030419/1). I.B. was supported by a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Academic Clinical Fellowship and a Doctoral Clinical Fellowship (DRF no. 302216). M.D. and Z.G.D. were funded by the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (Consolidator Grant No. 726104). H.L.F. was supported by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) Centre for Society and Mental Health at King’s College London (ES/S012567/1). I.S.M. was supported by the NIHR Health Protection Research Units in Environmental Exposures and Health, and Chemical and Radiation Threats and Hazards, a partnership between the UK Health Security Agency and Imperial College London. L.A.N. was supported by NERC (NE/R009236/1). The work of S.R. was supported by NERC award number NE/R016429/1 as part of the UK-SCAPE programme delivering National Capability. The views, interpretations, and conclusions in the article are those of the authors and not necessarily those of NERC or other funders supporting author’s involvement or entities with whom authors are affiliated. Publisher Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.

PY - 2023/3/27

Y1 - 2023/3/27

N2 - Mental health is influenced by multiple complex and interacting genetic, psychological, social, and environmental factors. As such, developing state-of-the-art mental health knowledge requires collaboration across academic disciplines, including environmental science. To assess the current contribution of environmental science to this field, a scoping review of the literature on environmental influences on mental health (including conditions of cognitive development and decline) was conducted. The review protocol was developed in consultation with experts working across mental health and environmental science. The scoping review included 202 English-language papers, published between 2010 and 2020 (prior to the COVID-19 pandemic), on environmental themes that had not already been the subject of recent systematic reviews; 26 reviews on climate change, flooding, air pollution, and urban green space were additionally considered. Studies largely focused on populations in the USA, China, or Europe and involved limited environmental science input. Environmental science research methods are primarily focused on quantitative approaches utilising secondary datasets or field data. Mental health measurement was dominated by the use of self-report psychometric scales. Measures of environmental states or exposures were often lacking in specificity (e.g., limited to the presence or absence of an environmental state). Based on the scoping review findings and our synthesis of the recent reviews, a research agenda for environmental science's future contribution to mental health scholarship is set out. This includes recommendations to expand the geographical scope and broaden the representation of different environmental science areas, improve measurement of environmental exposure, prioritise experimental and longitudinal research designs, and giving greater consideration to variation between and within communities and the mediating pathways by which environment influences mental health. There is also considerable opportunity to increase interdisciplinarity within the field via the integration of conceptual models, the inclusion of mixed methods and qualitative approaches, as well as further consideration of the socio-political context and the environmental states that can help support good mental health. The findings were used to propose a conceptual model to parse contributions and connections between environmental science and mental health to inform future studies.

AB - Mental health is influenced by multiple complex and interacting genetic, psychological, social, and environmental factors. As such, developing state-of-the-art mental health knowledge requires collaboration across academic disciplines, including environmental science. To assess the current contribution of environmental science to this field, a scoping review of the literature on environmental influences on mental health (including conditions of cognitive development and decline) was conducted. The review protocol was developed in consultation with experts working across mental health and environmental science. The scoping review included 202 English-language papers, published between 2010 and 2020 (prior to the COVID-19 pandemic), on environmental themes that had not already been the subject of recent systematic reviews; 26 reviews on climate change, flooding, air pollution, and urban green space were additionally considered. Studies largely focused on populations in the USA, China, or Europe and involved limited environmental science input. Environmental science research methods are primarily focused on quantitative approaches utilising secondary datasets or field data. Mental health measurement was dominated by the use of self-report psychometric scales. Measures of environmental states or exposures were often lacking in specificity (e.g., limited to the presence or absence of an environmental state). Based on the scoping review findings and our synthesis of the recent reviews, a research agenda for environmental science's future contribution to mental health scholarship is set out. This includes recommendations to expand the geographical scope and broaden the representation of different environmental science areas, improve measurement of environmental exposure, prioritise experimental and longitudinal research designs, and giving greater consideration to variation between and within communities and the mediating pathways by which environment influences mental health. There is also considerable opportunity to increase interdisciplinarity within the field via the integration of conceptual models, the inclusion of mixed methods and qualitative approaches, as well as further consideration of the socio-political context and the environmental states that can help support good mental health. The findings were used to propose a conceptual model to parse contributions and connections between environmental science and mental health to inform future studies.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85152314036&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3390/ijerph20075278

DO - 10.3390/ijerph20075278

M3 - Review article

SN - 1660-4601

VL - 20

JO - International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health

JF - International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health

IS - 7

M1 - 5278

ER -

The contribution of environmental science to mental health research: A scoping review

Abstract

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this