Introduction: Nature provides an array of health benefits, and recent decades have seen a resurgence in nature-based interventions (NBI). While NBI have shown promise in addressing health needs, the wide variety of intervention approaches create difficulty in understanding the efficacy of NBI as a whole. This scoping review will (1) identify the different nomenclature used to define NBI, (2) describe the interventions used and the contexts in which they occurred and (3) describe the methodologies and measurement tools used in NBI studies.
Methods and analysis: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols Extension for Scoping Reviews, four databases will be searched (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global) as well as cross-referencing for published and unpublished (masters theses and dissertations) studies on NBI in humans. Eligible studies must employ intervention or observational designs, and an English-language abstract will be required. Database searches will occur from inception up to the date of the search. Animal-based therapies and virtual-reality therapies involving simulated nature will be excluded. Independent dual screening and data abstraction will be conducted. Results will be analysed qualitatively as well as with simple descriptive statistics (frequencies and percentages).
Ethics and dissemination: Since this is a scoping review of previously published summary data, ethical approval for this study is not needed. Findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. This protocol has been registered with Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/mtzc8).
Keywords: COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE; MENTAL HEALTH; PUBLIC HEALTH.
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.